From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bibeau v. Pacific Northwest Research Foundation Inc.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Apr 12, 2000
208 F.3d 831 (9th Cir. 2000)
Download
PDF
Check
Treatment

Summary

holding that the limitations period does not begin to run until a plaintiff "has knowledge of the critical facts of his injury, which are that he has been hurt and who has inflicted the injury"

Summary of this case from Norton v. LVNV Funding, LLC
See 7 Summaries

Opinion

No. 97-35825

Filed April 12, 2000

D.C. No. CV-95-06410-MRH

Before: J. CLIFFORD WALLACE and ALEX KOZINSKI, Circuit Judges, and DAVID ALAN EZRA, District Judge.

The Honorable David Alan Ezra, United States District Judge for the District of Hawaii, sitting by designation.

ORDER

The petition for rehearing is denied.

The third sentence of Footnote 1 of the opinion filed on August 19, 1999 is amended to read as follows:

"We do not address whether this or any other harm Bibeau claims to have suffered amounts to a cognizable injury under Bibeau's various state and federal law theories."

Summaries of

Bibeau v. Pacific Northwest Research Foundation Inc.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Apr 12, 2000
208 F.3d 831 (9th Cir. 2000)

holding that the limitations period does not begin to run until a plaintiff "has knowledge of the critical facts of his injury, which are that he has been hurt and who has inflicted the injury"

Summary of this case from Norton v. LVNV Funding, LLC

applying discovery rule in an Eighth Amendment action involving experimental testicular irradiation experiments in prison

Summary of this case from Johnson v. Chudy

explaining that the "twist" of the discovery rule is that it requires "[t]he plaintiff [to] be diligent in discovering the critical facts," i.e. , "that he has been hurt and who has inflicted the injury"

Summary of this case from Oracle Am., Inc. v. Hewlett Packard Enter.

applying discovery rule in an Eighth Amendment action involving experimental testicular irradiation experiments in prison, brought years after the experiments ended

Summary of this case from McDaniel v. Lizarraga

applying discovery rule in an Eighth Amendment action involving irradiation experiments in prison, brought years after the experiments ended

Summary of this case from Johnson v. Naku

applying discovery rule to state law personal injury statute of limitation under § 1983 where the statute begins to run "once a plaintiff has knowledge of the ‘critical facts’ of his injury, which are ‘that he has been hurt and who has inflicted the injury.’ "

Summary of this case from Moyle v. Liberty Mut. Ret. Benefit Plan

choosing to address issue of qualified immunity, although not considered by the trial court, because it was a pure question of law subject to de novo review, and "any decision by the district court would be entitled to no deference."

Summary of this case from Gov't of Guam v. Kim
Case details for

Bibeau v. Pacific Northwest Research Foundation Inc.

Case Details

Full title:HAROLD BIBEAU; MELANIE ANN DOOYEN BIBEAU, on their own and as…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Apr 12, 2000

Citations

208 F.3d 831 (9th Cir. 2000)

Citing Cases

White v. Bd. of Prison Terms

But the plaintiff must be diligent in discovering the critical facts. See Bibeau v. Pacific Northwest…

Webb v. Douglas County

The parties did not brief the issue in the district court, and the district court was not given an…

47 Citing Cases