LEROY WILLIS, Jr. v. W. Bill Kollender;

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
tk/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
LEROY WILLIS, Jr.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
W. BILL KOLLENDER; et al.,
Defendants.
No. 08-56879
D.C. No. 3:08-cv-00844-JAH-
JMA
MEMORANDUM *
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
John A. Houston, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 16, 2010 **
Before: FERNANDEZ, GOULD, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Leroy Willis, Jr., a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district
court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that sheriff’s
FILED
MAR 02 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

tk/Research 08-56879 2
deputies used excessive force against him. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1291. We review de novo a district court’s dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.
Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000). We affirm.
The district court properly concluded that Willis’s action was time-barred.
See Cal. Civ. Proc. § 335.1 (providing a two-year statute of limitations for personal
injury claims); Jones v. Blanas, 393 F.3d 918, 927 (9th Cir. 2004) (“For actions
under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, courts apply the forum state’s statute of limitations for
personal injury actions.”). Contrary to Willis’s contentions, the statute of
limitations began to run when the wrongful act results in damages, not when the
full extent of those damages are understood. See Wallace v. Kato, 549 U.S. 384,
391 (2007).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --