Heffner

Heffner v. Young

Good Law
227 F. App'x 586
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 3, 2007Nos. 05-15101, 05-15102California629 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

*587 Chandi Duke Heffner appeals the district court’s decision to dismiss in part and stay in part her suit against the Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources (“DLNR”) and certain DLNR officials. Heffner argues that the DLNR defendants committed due process, double jeopardy, racketeering, and Takings Clause violations when they demanded that she allow a public right of way across her property as a condition for receiving a permit. The DLNR defendants cross-appeal, asserting that the district court should have dismissed rather than stayed Heffner’s takings claim. We affirm the district court in full.

1. Heffner’s claim that the DLNR’s order of September 2, 1999, violated her due process rights is time barred. Because the alleged violation became apparent when the order was issued, the two-year statute of limitations began to run at that time and expired before Heffner filed this action. See De Anza Props. X Ltd. v. County of Santa Cruz, 936 F.2d 1084 , 1086 (9th Cir.1991); see also Haw.Rev.Stat. § 657-7.

2. Heffner’s due process and double jeopardy claims arising out of the DLNR’s orders of March 11, 2003, and January 27, 2004, also fail. Heffner received…

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.