Cecconi v. Beneficial Solutions, LLC
3:19-cv-00599
D. Nev.Mar 2, 2020Background
- Plaintiff Dean Cecconi sued Beneficial Solutions, LLC and Russell B. Altman for strict products liability after ingesting NutraSilver®, alleging permanent argyria and related emotional/occupational harm.
- Complaint filed September 27, 2019, alleging NutraSilver® caused physical injury; diagnosis and plaintiff’s awareness of the injury occurred by February 2016.
- Defendants moved to dismiss under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), arguing the claim is barred by Nevada’s two-year statute of limitations, NRS § 11.190(4)(e).
- Cecconi argued the four-year default statute, NRS § 11.220, governs and alternatively sought certification of the controlling statutory question to the Nevada Supreme Court.
- The district court relied on its prior reasoning in Azefor, concluded the gravamen is personal physical injury so the two-year statute applies, and found Cecconi’s claim time-barred.
- Court granted defendants’ motion to dismiss, denied the motion to certify as moot, and entered judgment on March 2, 2020.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Applicable statute of limitations: two-year NRS § 11.190(4)(e) vs. four-year NRS § 11.220 | Apply four-year default statute § 11.220 to products-liability claim | Two-year personal-injury statute § 11.190(4)(e) applies because claim seeks recovery for physical injury | Two-year statute applies; claim time-barred |
| Whether to certify question to Nevada Supreme Court | Certify controlling statute question for state court resolution | Oppose certification; federal court can decide based on existing Nevada authority | Certification denied as moot because claim dismissed under two-year statute |
Key Cases Cited
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (plausibility pleading standard under Rule 8)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (two-step Rule 12(b)(6) analysis; accept well-pleaded facts, disregard legal conclusions)
- Car Carriers, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co., 745 F.2d 1101 (7th Cir. 1984) (complaint must allege material elements to state a viable claim)
- Blotzke v. The Christmas Tree, Inc., 499 P.2d 647 (Nev. 1972) (determine controlling limitations by gravamen/real purpose of action)
- Hartford Ins. Grp. v. Statewide Appliances, Inc., 484 P.2d 569 (Nev. 1971) (limitations period depends on nature of action)
- Fisher v. Professional Compounding Ctrs. of America, Inc., 311 F. Supp. 2d 1008 (D. Nev. 2004) (district court applied four-year statute in a products-liability context)