COUNTY OF WAYNE ET AL.
v.
CARROLL
Justice White,
dissenting.
This case presents the question of which state statute of limitations should be applied in a case brought under 42 U. S. C. § 1983 when more than one state statute arguably can be characterized as addressing “personal injury” claims. See Wilson v. Garcia, 471 U. S. 261 (1985). The lower courts continue to struggle with this question. In this case, for example, the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, 754 F. 2d 662 (1985), concluded that a 3-year, catchall statute should be applied which covers actions brought “to recover damages for the death of a person, or for injury to a person or property.” Mich. Comp. Laws §600.5805(8) (1979). The Sixth Circuit chose this section over other 2-year sections which specifically cover intentional torts. See, e. g., Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.5805(2) (1979) (“The period of limitations is 2 years for an action charging assault, battery, or false imprisonment.”) In so deciding, the Sixth Circuit has taken an approach directly contrary to its earlier decision in Mulligan v. Hazard, 777 F. 2d 340, 344 (1985), cert. denied, 476 U. S. 1174 (1986).
I dissented from the denial of certiorari in Mulligan because of the split among the Courts of Appeals in dealing with this question, and I dissent here because the confusion evidenced by this split is underscored by the Sixth Circuit’s change in approach.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (19 total)
-
Owens v. Okure, 488 U.S. 235 (U.S. 1989)…atute of limitations for [*242] injury done to the person of another); Carroll v. Wilkerson, 782 F. 2d 44, 45 (CA6) (per curiam) (selecting Michigan general personal injury statute of limitations), cert, denied sub nom. County of Wayne v. Wilkerson, 479 U. S. 923 (1986). See, e.g., Meade v. Grubbs, 841 F. 2d 1512, 1523-1524, and 1524, n. 11 (CA10 1988) (selecting Oklahoma statute of limitations for “‘injury to the rights of another, not arising on contract and not hereinafter enumerated,’ ” and rejecting st…
-
Browning v. Pendleton, 869 F.2d 989 (6th Cir. 1989)…ivil rights actions filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1982) as required by the Supreme Court in Wilson v. Garcia, 471 U.S. 261, 105 S.Ct. 1938, 85 L.Ed.2d 254 (1985). Compare Carroll v. Wilkerson, 782 F. 2d 44 (6th Cir.) (per curiam), cert. denied 479 U.S. 923, 107 S.Ct. 330, 93 L.Ed.2d 302 (1986), with Mulligan v. Hazard, 777 F. 2d 340 (6th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 476 U.S. 1174, 106 S.Ct. 2902, 90 L.Ed.2d 988 (1986). Simply stated, the question before us is whether the appropriate statute of limitations…
-
United States v. Cammisano, 917 F.2d 1057 (8th Cir. 1990)…misano’s violent disposition. However, the jury acquitted him of witness tampering under 18 U.S.C. § 1512, which requires the use of physical force, threats or intimidation. See United States v. Risken, 788 F. 2d 1361, 1368 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 923, 107 S.Ct. 329, 93 L.Ed.2d 302 (1986). The jury only convicted Cammisano of obstruction of justice under 18 U.S.C. § 1503, which does not require the use of force, threats or intimidation. See id. Thus, any error in the admission of the tape did not…
Previewing 3 of 19 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Wilson v. Garcia, 471 U.S. 261 (U.S. 1985)
- Mulligan v. Hazard, 777 F.2d 340 (6th Cir. 1985)
- Burke v. United States, 476 U.S. 1174 (U.S. 1986)
- Mulligan v. Hazard, 476 U.S. 1174 (U.S. 1986)
- United States v. Allstate Ins. Co., 754 F.2d 662 (6th Cir. 1985)