Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 9400682
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Nicholas Anderson v. D. Scott
No. 9400682 · Decided May 19, 2023
No. 9400682·Ninth Circuit · 2023·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
May 19, 2023
Citation
No. 9400682
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 19 2023
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
NICHOLAS D. ANDERSON, No. 22-16086
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:21-cv-01510-GMS-ESW
v.
MEMORANDUM*
D. SCOTT, #2251; J. BERMUDEZ, #1832;
K. SHORE, #0102, Lt.; M. GAYNOR,
#2139; C. NEWMAN, #2088; AVONDALE
POLICE DEPARTMENT; J. MENDEZ,
(#2145) Officer; DOES, unknown parties,
possibly named: J Neader #2145; Phil Cf,
Risk Management; Chief of Police Avondale,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
G. Murray Snow, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 16, 2023**
Before: BENNETT, MILLER, and VANDYKE, Circuit Judges.
Nicholas D. Anderson appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging various constitutional claims. We
have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Pouncil v. Tilton,
704 F.3d 568, 574 (9th Cir. 2012) (dismissal of an action as time-barred); Watison
v. Carter, 668 F.3d 1108, 1112 (9th Cir. 2012) (dismissal of an action under 28
U.S.C. § 1915(e)). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Anderson’s action as time-barred
because Anderson’s claims accrued more than two years before Anderson filed this
action, and even with the benefit of any applicable tolling, Anderson’s claims are
barred by the statute of limitations. See Soto v. Sweetman, 882 F.3d 865, 871 (9th
Cir. 2018) (“Federal courts in § 1983 actions apply the state statute of limitations
from personal-injury claims and borrow the state’s tolling rules.”); TwoRivers v.
Lewis, 174 F.3d 987, 991-92 (9th Cir. 1999) (explaining that civil rights claims
accrue, based on federal law, “when the plaintiff knows or has reason to know of
the injury which is the basis of the action;” and that “[i]n Arizona, the courts apply
a two-year statute of limitations to § 1983 claims”).
AFFIRMED.
2 22-16086
Plain English Summary
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 19 2023 MOLLY C.
Key Points
01NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 19 2023 MOLLY C.
02MENDEZ, (#2145) Officer; DOES, unknown parties, possibly named: J Neader #2145; Phil Cf, Risk Management; Chief of Police Avondale, Defendants-Appellees.
03Murray Snow, District Judge, Presiding Submitted May 16, 2023** Before: BENNETT, MILLER, and VANDYKE, Circuit Judges.
04Anderson appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Frequently Asked Questions
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 19 2023 MOLLY C.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Nicholas Anderson v. D. Scott in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on May 19, 2023.
Use the citation No. 9400682 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.