Hunter

Hunter v. Gates

Good Law
68 F. App'x 69
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 17, 2003No. 02-55427; D.C. No. CV-99-12811-GAFCalifornia558 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

D’N Hunter appeals the district court’s dismissal, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , RICO, and coram nobis claims against Los Angeles officials. He also appeals the dis *71 trict court’s decision to grant absolute prosecutorial immunity from civil RICO claims to former District Attorney Gilbert Garcetti. Reviewing de novo, we affirm the district court’s dismissal. We recount the facts only as necessary to explain our result.

1. A § 1988 claim accrues when a plaintiff knows or has reason to know of the injury upon which his claim is based. Cabrera v. City of Huntington Park, 159 F.3d 374, 379 (9th Cir.1998). At ah relevant times, the statute of limitations for § 1983 claims in California was one year. Id. at 377; Cal.Civ.Proc.Code § 340.3 (1999). Hunter filed his lawsuit on December 6, 1999, more than one year after he had reason to know of the injuries upon which his § 1983 claims were based.

Assuming common law equitable tolling would be available, no facts constituting elements of Hunter’s cause of action were concealed from him. And taking into account statutory tolling available to Hunter under California law, see…

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.