Young

Young v. Quatermass

Good Law
59 F. App'x 936
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 19, 2003No. 02-35148; D.C. No. CV-00-05657-JKACalifornia420 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Colin Young appeals pro se the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action, alleging that Kitsap County officials violated his constitutional rights and falsely accused him of county code violations. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Schneider v. County of San Diego, 28 F.3d 89, 91 (9th Cir.1994), and we affirm.

The magistrate judge properly determined that Young’s claims relating to citations he received prior to September 7, 1997, are barred by the statute of limitations. See Wash. Rev.Code §§ 4.16.080(2), 4.96.020; RK Ventures, Inc. v. City of Seattle, 307 F.3d 1045, 1058 (9th Cir.2002). The continuing violations doctrine was not applicable because Young failed to show that alleged incidents occurring before and after the limitations period were inseparable or dependent on each other. See Flowers v. Carville, 310 F.3d 1118, 1126 (9th Cir.2002) (explaining that the continuing violations doctrine applies where there is “no single incident” that can “fairly or realistically be identified as the cause of significant harm”).

The magistrate judge properly granted summary judgment on Young’s retaliation and…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.