GRAY v. STALEY

1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
___________________________________
)
LINWOOD GRAY, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 25-4151 (UNA)
)
HARRY L. STALEY, )
)
Defendant. )
___________________________________ )
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on consideration of Plaintiff’s application for leave to
proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2) and pro se complaint (ECF No. 1). The court GRANTS
the application and, for the reasons discussed below, DISMISSES the complaint.
Plaintiff and Defendant entered into a partnership in or about September 1978 and,
according to Plaintiff, the partnership has not been dissolved. See Compl. at 2. Defendant
allegedly diverted assets for the purpose of establishing a separate business “in violation of
fiduciary duties and statutory obligations,” id., “excluded Plaintiff from decision-making, [and]
withheld profits” from Plaintiff, id. Here, Plaintiff demands a declaration that the partnership
remains in existence, see id., “a full accounting of partnership asses, liabilities, income, and
expenditures from November 1995 to present,” id. at 3 (emphasis removed), and damages, see
id.
Under District of Columbia law, an action “accrues” within the meaning of D.C. Code §
12-302 “when the plaintiff suffers an injury.” District of Columbia v. Tinker, 691 A.2d 57, 64
(D.C. 1997). By requesting an accounting dating back to November 1995, Plaintiff suggests that
his cause of action arose then. It appears that, to the extent plaintiff raises valid legal claims,
Case 1:25-cv-04151-UNA Document 3 Filed 03/23/26 Page 1 of 2

2
they are time-barred. This outcome should come as no surprise to Plaintiff, given his lack of
success in suing this Defendant twice before. See Gray v. Staley, 221 F. Supp. 3d 35, 40 (D.D.C.
2016) (concluding that District of Columbia’s three-year statute of limitations barred all claims),
aff’d, 707 F. App’x 2 (D.C. Cir. 2017) (per curiam); see also Gray v. Staley, No. 24-cv-1429
(D.D.C. July 1, 2024) (dismissing claims as barred by statute of limitations and under doctrine of
res judicata).
An Order is issued separately.
DATE: March 20, 2026 /s/
TANYA S. CHUTKAN
United States District Judge
Case 1:25-cv-04151-UNA Document 3 Filed 03/23/26 Page 2 of 2