Antwon Whitten v. C.W. Franks

Summary

The United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia dismissed Antwon Whitten’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against C.W. Franks as barred by Virginia’s two-year statute of limitations. The court rejected arguments based on continuing effects, lack of jurisdiction, and tolling, declined supplemental jurisdiction over any state-law claims, and directed the Clerk to close the case.

Holdings

1. A court may resolve a statute-of-limitations defense on a Rule 12(b)(6) motion when all facts necessary to establish the defense clearly appear on the face of the complaint.
2. Section 1983 claims arising in Virginia are subject to Virginia's two-year personal-injury statute of limitations.
3. A § 1983 cause of action accrues under federal law when the plaintiff possesses sufficient facts about the harm that reasonable inquiry would reveal the cause of action, or knows or has reason to know of the injury.
4. Continuing effects of a discrete violation do not extend the limitations period; the continuing-violation doctrine applies only when the unlawful acts themselves continue.
5. Whitten did not establish a basis for tolling the limitations period, and his contention that the challenged disciplinary disposition was void ab initio did not eliminate the limitations bar.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the court could resolve the statute-of-limitations defense on a Rule 12(b)(6) motion.
2. Whether Whitten's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims were barred by the applicable two-year statute of limitations.
3. Whether the continuing-violation theory or a void-ab-initio jurisdictional theory extended or eliminated the limitations bar.
4. Whether the court should exercise supplemental jurisdiction over any state-law claims after dismissing the federal claims.

Disposition

dismissed