Amin Ijbara Equity Corp. v. Village of Oak Lawn
2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 10794
7th Cir.2017Background
- Plaintiff Amin Ijbara owned a strip mall in Oak Lawn, Illinois; he alleges village officials engaged in a campaign of harassment (frivolous inspections, baseless citations, blocking tenant licenses) after he refused to force tenants to stop selling liquor.
- The alleged harassment forced Ijbara to incur unnecessary repair costs and reduced rental revenue, leading to mortgage default.
- Lender initiated foreclosure on February 22, 2011; a state court appointed a receiver on April 22, 2011; final judgment of foreclosure entered July 3, 2012.
- Ijbara filed a § 1983 class-of-one equal-protection suit against the village and two officials on December 31, 2013, seeking damages for selective enforcement.
- Defendants moved to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) as time-barred by the two-year Illinois limitations period; the district court dismissed, holding the claim accrued no later than the receiver’s appointment (April 22, 2011).
- The Seventh Circuit affirmed, holding accrual occurred when Ijbara knew the fact and cause of his injury (at or before receiver appointment), so the suit was untimely.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| When did Ijbara’s § 1983 class-of-one claim accrue for limitations purposes? | Accrual occurred only at final judgment of foreclosure (July 3, 2012), so suit filed Dec. 31, 2013 is timely. | Accrual occurred when Ijbara knew the fact and cause of injury—at least by foreclosure filing or receiver appointment (Feb–Apr 2011)—so suit is time-barred. | Held: Accrual occurred no later than receiver appointment (Apr 22, 2011); suit untimely and dismissal affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Wallace v. Kato, 549 U.S. 384 (accrual when plaintiff can file suit and obtain relief)
- Reget v. City of La Crosse, 595 F.3d 691 (class-of-one equal protection framework)
- Hileman v. Maze, 367 F.3d 694 (accrual depends on when the constitutional injury becomes certain)
- O’Gorman v. City of Chicago, 777 F.3d 885 (accrual rule: plaintiff knows fact and cause of injury)