From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cooper v. City of Ashland

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Apr 3, 1989
871 F.2d 104 (9th Cir. 1989)

Summary

holding that because the last day of Oregon's two-year statute of limitations in a personal injury suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 ended on the Saturday preceding Columbus Day, the plaintiff could file on the following Tuesday

Summary of this case from Legras v. Aetna Life Ins. Co.

Opinion

No. 87-4187.

Submitted December 29, 1988.

The panel finds this case appropriate for submission without oral argument pursuant to Ninth Circuit Rule 34-4 and Fed.R.App.P. 34(a).

Decided April 3, 1989. As Amended May 11, 1989.

Mark Cooper, Santa Rosa, Cal., in pro se.

Allan M. Muir and James P. Martin, Schwabe, Williamson Wyatt, Portland, Or., for defendants-appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon.

Before MERRILL, REINHARDT and HALL, Circuit Judges.



Cooper appeals pro se the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendants in this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. We reverse.

Cooper's complaint alleged that he had been arrested in violation of his Fourteenth Amendment constitutional rights "on or about October 11, 1984." Cooper mailed the complaint on October 9, 1986, return receipt requested. The return receipt was signed by an employee in the clerk's office and dated October 13, 1986. The complaint itself was stamped "received" on October 15, 1986, and stamped "filed" on October 21, 1986. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the respondents on the ground that the complaint was barred by the statute of limitations.

Oregon's two-year statute of limitations for personal injury actions applies to actions under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See Or. Rev.Stat. § 12.110(1); Owens v. Okure, ___ U.S. ___, 109 S.Ct. 573, 102 L.Ed. 2d 594 (1989); Wilson v. Garcia, 471 U.S. 261, 280, 105 S.Ct. 1938, 1949, 85 L.Ed.2d 254 (1985); Davis v. Harvey, 789 F.2d 1332, 1333 (9th Cir. 1986). The last day for timely filing of Cooper's complaint would ordinarily have been October 11, 1986, but that date was a Saturday. The following Monday, October 13, 1986, was Columbus Day, a legal holiday. The last day for timely filing of Cooper's complaint was therefore Tuesday, October 14, 1986. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(a). When papers are mailed to the clerk's office, filing is complete when the papers are received by the clerk. 2 J. Moore, Moore's Federal Practice ¶ 5.11 (2d ed. 1988); 4A C. Wright A. Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure § 1153 (2d ed. 1987); see also Torras Herreria y Construcciones, S.A. v. M/V Timur Star, 803 F.2d 215, 216 (6th Cir. 1986). Because the clerk's office received the complaint on October 13, 1986, before the statute of limitations expired, the complaint was timely filed.

REVERSED and REMANDED.


Summaries of

Cooper v. City of Ashland

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Apr 3, 1989
871 F.2d 104 (9th Cir. 1989)

holding that because the last day of Oregon's two-year statute of limitations in a personal injury suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 ended on the Saturday preceding Columbus Day, the plaintiff could file on the following Tuesday

Summary of this case from Legras v. Aetna Life Ins. Co.

holding that when civil rights complaint is mailed to the clerk's office, it is filed when received

Summary of this case from Turner v. Singletary

instructing that Oregon's two-year statute of limitations for personal injury actions applies to actions under § 1983

Summary of this case from Little, v. Anderson
Case details for

Cooper v. City of Ashland

Case Details

Full title:MARK COOPER, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. CITY OF ASHLAND; BRIAN ALMQUIST; VIC…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Apr 3, 1989

Citations

871 F.2d 104 (9th Cir. 1989)

Citing Cases

Heilbrun v. Wash. Cnty.

Plaintiff's first, fourth, eighth, ninth, eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth claims arise under 42 U.S.C. §…

Wilson v. State

The residual statute is ORS § 12.110(1), which establishes a two-year statute of limitations. See Cooper v.…