Summary
holding that the limitations period for all actions based on contract or liability applies to claims created by statute, and citing Ark. Stats. § 37-206 which was later changed to conform to the official Arkansas Code of 1987 — Ark. Code Ann. § 16-56-105
Summary of this case from Gonser v. Continental Cas. Co.Opinion
No. 81-1534.
Submitted May 7, 1982.
Decided May 11, 1982.
John W. Walker, Richard Quiggle, Little Rock, Ark., for appellant.
Nelwyn Davis, Asst. Atty. Gen., Little Rock, Ark., Ray Trammell, Gen. Counsel, Fayetteville, Ark., for appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas.
Before HEANEY, HENLEY and McMILLIAN, Circuit Judges.
Premanand V. Wagh appeals the dismissal by the district court of his complaint asserting a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 and 1983 as being barred by the three-year Arkansas statute of limitations governing liabilities created by statute. Ark.Stat.Ann. § 37-206. We affirm.
The Honorable Henry Woods, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.
Appellant asserts that since his case involves termination of his written employment contract that the five-year Arkansas statute of limitations governing actions on written contracts should control. Ark.Stat.Ann. § 37-209. This argument is without merit. The choice between sections 37-209 and 37-206 for a civil rights action involving termination or non-renewal of an employment contract has been presented to this court on several occasions and each time this court has held that the appropriate statute of limitations is section 37-206. Marshall v. Kirkland, 602 F.2d 1282 (8th Cir. 1979); Martin v. Georgia-Pacific Corp., 568 F.2d 58 (8th Cir. 1977); Clark v. Mann, 562 F.2d 1104 (8th Cir. 1977).
Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed.