Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Daniel L. ALLEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. R. David MITCHELL; Timothy J. McKoy; Kevin A. Barnes; Larry M. Dunston; Shelton E. Rogers; Juanita R. James; Maranda C. Mims; Colbert L. Respass, Defendants-Appellees, Frank L. Perry; Robert D. Fountain; Terry J. Lemon; Jerry L. Crawford; Christopher B. Rich; George T. Solomon, Defendants.
Daniel L. Allen appeals the district court's order and judgment granting Defendants’ motion for summary judgment and dismissing Allen's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights complaint. The court's order granting summary judgment may be affirmed on any ground appearing in the record, “including theories not relied upon or rejected by the district court.” Scott v. United States, 328 F.3d 132, 137 (4th Cir. 2003). We conclude that Allen's claims are barred by North Carolina's three-year statute of limitations. See Wallace v. Kato, 549 U.S. 384, 387, 127 S.Ct. 1091, 166 L.Ed.2d 973 (2007) (noting length of statute of limitations in § 1983 action determined by state law); Brooks v. City of Winston-Salem, 85 F.3d 178, 181 (4th Cir. 1996) (applying North Carolina's three-year statute of limitations for § 1983 action). Allen's claims accrued at the latest on May 20, 2010, the date of his second disciplinary hearing. Allen filed his complaint at the earliest on May 7, 2016, the date Allen signed his original complaint, clearly three years beyond the accrual date for statute of limitation purposes.
Accordingly, we affirm the district court's order and judgment. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
PER CURIAM:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 20-6425
Decided: March 29, 2021
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
FindLaw for Legal Professionals
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)