Legal Opinion
Harrison v. County of Alameda
District Court, N.D. California
Decided July 18, 1989No. C-87-5111 MHP, C-87-4326 MHPPublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
PATEL, District Judge.
The court consolidated these cases for hearing on the issue of which statute of limitations governs actions brought under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1983 in the state of California following the Supreme Court decision in Owens v. Okure, — U.S. -, 109 S.Ct. 573, 102 L.Ed.2d 594 (1989). Having considered the submissions and arguments of the parties and amici, for the following reasons, the court finds that the one-year statute of limitation, California Code of Civil Procedure § 340(3), applies to actions under §§ 1981 and 1983.
The court today also issues separate orders…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Wilson v. GarciaSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Owens v. OkureSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Board of Regents of Univ. of State of NY v. TomanioSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Sterling Usher v. City of Los Angeles, Richard A. Gonzales, Michael E. Melton, Jose E. Ramirez, Joe Rios, and Robert L. VannCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1987
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- McDougal v. County of ImperialCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
- Acuña v. Regents of the University of CaliforniaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1997
- Stone v. City and County of San FranciscoDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1990
- Van Pool v. City and County of San FranciscoDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1990
- No. 90-55774Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991