RICHARD JENKINS V. KENNETH LITTLE, No. 20-35195 (9th Cir. 2021)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED MAR 25 2021 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT RICHARD ANTHONY JENKINS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 20-35195 D.C. No. 1:19-cv-00247-DCN MEMORANDUM* KENNETH LITTLE, M.D., Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Idaho David C. Nye, District Judge, Presiding Submitted March 16, 2021** Before: GRABER, R. NELSON, and HUNSAKER, Circuit Judges. Oregon state prisoner Richard Anthony Jenkins appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Watison v. Carter, 668 F.3d 1108, 1112 (9th Cir. * 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). 2012) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii)); Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A). We affirm. The district court properly dismissed Jenkins’s action because his claim was barred by the statute of limitations. See Idaho Code § 5-219(4) (two-year statute of limitations for personal injury actions); Soto v. Sweetman, 882 F.3d 865, 871-72 (9th Cir. 2018) (state tolling and statute of limitations for personal injury claims apply to § 1983 actions; federal law governs when a claim accrues, which is when a plaintiff knows or should know of the injury that forms the basis for his cause of action). Jenkins’s contention that equitable tolling or equitable estoppel should apply is without merit. See Wilhelm v. Frampton, 158 P.3d 310, 312 (Idaho 2007) (Idaho courts cannot equitably toll statute of limitations); J.R. Simplot Co. v. Chemetics Int’l Inc., 887 P.2d 1039, 1041 (Idaho 1994) (equitable estoppel is available in Idaho only if plaintiff lacks actual or constructive knowledge of the truth), abrogated on other grounds by Day as Tr. of Tr. B of Donald M. Day & Marjorie D. Day Family Tr. v. Transportation Dep’t, 458 P.3d 162 (Idaho 2020). AFFIRMED. 2 20-35195

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.