Rodgers
Rodgers v. Horsely
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Russell D. Rodgers appeals the district court’s order granting M.D. Trott’s motion for summary judgment on the basis that his civil rights claims were barred by the statute of limitations. Rodgers contends that the district court committed the following errors: (1) ignoring the dismissal and consolidation orders previously entered in the same court by a different judge, (2) finding that the claims against Trott did not relate back to the original timely filed complaint, and (3) denying his motion for a continuance to obtain the *283 orders. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and affirm.
Trott, a California Board of Prisons Deputy, presided over Rodgers’ parole revocation extension hearing on December 16, 1992. Trott allegedly inappropriately ejected Rodgers from the hearing, enhanced the charges against him, improperly admitted evidence against him, ruled against him in absentia, and unlawfully extended his parole by 180 days. Rodgers was released from prison one year later, on December 16,1993.
Rodgers filed three pro se civil rights complaints in federal court under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . The first, filed November 22, 1994, identified a few…