TANYA LAWRENCE V. DR. BERRY, No. 12-16118 (9th Cir. 2013)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT FEB 19 2013 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS TANYA LATRICE LAWRENCE, Plaintiff - Appellant, No. 12-16118 D.C. No. 1:09-cv-01936-DLB v. MEMORANDUM * BERRY, Doctor; et al., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Dennis L. Beck, Magistrate Judge, Presiding ** Submitted February 11, 2013 *** Before: FERNANDEZ, TASHIMA, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges. California state prisoner Tanya Latrice Lawrence appeals pro se from the district court s judgment dismissing her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** Lawrence consented to proceed before a magistrate judge. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). *** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). deliberate indifference to her serious medical needs as barred by the statute of limitations. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Weilburg v. Shapiro, 488 F.3d 1202, 1205 (9th Cir. 2007). We affirm. The district court properly dismissed Lawrence s action as time-barred because all claims accrued more than four years before Lawrence filed her complaint. See Cal. Civ. Proc. Code §§ 335.1, 352.1(a) (two-year statute of limitations for personal injury claims; limitations period may be tolled for an additional two years for prisoners); Knox v. Davis, 260 F.3d 1009, 1012-13 (9th Cir. 2001) (§ 1983 actions are governed by the forum state s statute of limitations; a claim accrues when the plaintiff knows or has reason to know of the injury which is the basis of the action; continuing impact from past violations does not cause a claim to accrue anew). Lawrence s motion requesting a withdrawal and abeyance, filed on July 27, 2012, is denied as unnecessary. AFFIRMED. 2 12-16118

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.