Nares v. City and County of San Francisco
- Alex Tse
- 3:22-cv-07497
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Nares v. City and County of San Francisco, Judge Tse dismissed Nares’s civil-rights claims as untimely under California’s two-year filing deadline.
Jeremiah Nares’s claims against the City and County of San Francisco were dismissed with prejudice; the city received judgment and the case was closed.
What happened
Jeremiah Nares said a San Francisco police officer used excessive force and retaliated against his speech during a May 31, 2020, protest. He sued the City and County of San Francisco under a federal civil-rights law.
The city argued that Nares filed too late. The court ruled that even if his claims began on June 1, 2020, California’s pandemic tolling rule paused the deadline only from June 1 to October 1, 2020—not for the entire period Nares claimed. His complaint was due October 3, 2022, but he filed it on November 28, 2022.
Judge Tse granted the city’s motion to dismiss, dismissed Nares’s complaint with prejudice, directed judgment for the city, and ordered the case closed.
The detailed version
- Nares v. City and County of San Francisco · No. 3:22-cv-07497
- Alex Tse
- Apr. 25, 2023
Background
Jeremiah Nares alleged that, during a May 31, 2020, protest following George Floyd’s death, an unnamed San Francisco police officer shot him with a “less lethal firearm” and retaliated against his free speech. Nares brought claims for damages against the City and County of San Francisco under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal civil-rights statute.
The city moved to dismiss, arguing that the claims were barred by the statute of limitations—the deadline for filing a lawsuit. Nares filed his complaint on November 28, 2022. He maintained that his claims accrued on June 1, 2020, while the city argued that they accrued on May 31, 2020.
Analysis
The court applied California’s two-year limitations period for personal-injury claims, along with California’s tolling rules. California Emergency Rule 9(a) temporarily paused limitations periods longer than 180 days from April 6, 2020, through October 1, 2020. Both sides agreed that the rule applied.
The court used Nares’s proposed accrual date of June 1, 2020, and still found the complaint untimely. Because the claims accrued on June 1, the tolling period began on that date, not on April 6. The court calculated that the claims were tolled for 122 days, until October 1, 2020. It rejected Nares’s argument that he was entitled to 178 days of tolling, because tolling cannot apply before a claim accrues and the limitations period begins.
Starting on October 1, 2020, Nares had two years to file. The court determined that the filing deadline was Monday, October 3, 2022. Because Nares filed on November 28, 2022, the claims were time barred.
Disposition
Judge Alex G. Tse granted the City and County of San Francisco’s motion to dismiss. The court dismissed the complaint with prejudice, directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment for the city, and ordered the case file closed.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.