Turner

MEMORANDUM *

The facts and procedures are known to the parties and we do not repeat them here. David Hallberg appeals two judgments entered against him in favor of Dana Turner and the City of Portland. Hallberg presents a myriad of challenges on appeal, arguing that (1) the statute of limitations bars Turner’s claims, (2) Turner produced insufficient evidence to prove causation, (3) Turner produced insufficient evidence to prove an equal protection violation, (4) Turner produced insufficient evidence to establish interference with contract, (5) Turner produced insufficient evidence to establish outrageous conduct, (6) Turner produced insufficient evidence to prove economic damages, (7) Hallberg is entitled to qualified immunity, (8) the district court should not have awarded punitive damages, (9) Hallberg was entitled to defense and immunity from the City of Portland, and (10) Turner was not entitled to attorney’s fees. For the reasons set forth below, we now affirm.

Hallberg’s main argument is that the statute of limitations bars Turner’s claims because her cause of action accrued prior to February 2002. We review de novo a district court’s decisions regarding accrual of the…