No. 19-321

James Mills v. City of Covina, California, et al.

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2019-09-09
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response Waived
Tags: civil-procedure civil-rights due-process heck-doctrine heck-v-humphrey legal-tolling plaintiff-rights section-356 standing statute-of-limitations
Key Terms:
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference: 2019-10-11
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Does section 356 of the California Civil Procedure Code, which tolls a statute of limitations during any period that a plaintiff is legally prevented from taking action to protect his or her rights, apply during the period that a plaintiff's claim is barred by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994)?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED Does section 356 of the California Civil Procedure Code, which tolls a statute of limitations during any period that a plaintiff is legally prevented from taking action to protect his or her rights, apply during the period that a plaintiff's claim is barred by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994)?

Docket Entries

2019-10-15
Petition DENIED.
2019-09-25
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/11/2019.
2019-09-11
Waiver of right of respondents City of Covina, California et al. to respond filed.
2019-08-03
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 9, 2019)

Attorneys

City of Covina, California et al.
Kevin Harold LouthManning & Kass Ellrod Ramirez Trester LLP, Respondent
James Mills
Kevin Andrew LipelesLipeles Law Group, APC, Petitioner