Sharon Hodges v. Steven Grimaud
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Sharon Louise Hodges appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing her action alleging federal and state law claims in connection with her ex-husband’s child support obligations. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo. Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058, 1061, 1065 (9th Cir.2004). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Hodges’s abuse of process, libel and slander, and intentional infliction of emotional distress claims because these claims were barred by the applicable statutes of limitations. See Ariz.Rev.Stat. § § 12-541(1), 12-542 (one-year statute of limitations for libel and slander claims; two-year statute of limitations for personal injury claims); CDT, Inc. v. Addison, Roberts & Ludwig, C.P.A., P.C., 198 Ariz. 173 , 7 P.3d 979, 982 (2000) (under the discovery rule, a claim does not accrue until the plaintiff knows, or with reasonable diligence should know, the facts underlying the claim).
The district court properly dismissed Hodges’s claim under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 , 91 S.Ct. 1999 , 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971), because Hodges failed to allege facts…