ESTATE OF AMARO v. City of Oakland
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 15534
| 9th Cir. | 2011Background
- In March 2000, Amaro was arrested in an Oakland police reverse drug sting; police report claimed a drug purchase with no force noted, but witnesses alleged severe beating.
- Witnesses testified Amaro was kicked, punched, and manhandled; Amaro complained of rib pain and requested medical aid, which was denied.
- Amaro died on April 21, 2000; autopsy attributed death to bronchopneumonia and hemothorax from multiple rib fractures due to blunt trauma.
- Internal Affairs investigation found excessive force, forged report signatures, and failure to document medical neglect; results were not disclosed to Montoya.
- Montoya sought police records and legal representation; multiple attorneys declined to take the § 1983 claim; Montoya filed a Cal. Gov. Code § 910 government claim in 2000.
- In 2009 the FBI opened an investigation revealing new pertinent information; Montoya then obtained counsel and filed the § 1983 suit in federal court, which the City moved to dismiss as untimely.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether equitable estoppel tolls the statute of limitations for §1983 claims | Montoya argues misrepresentations and stonewalling prevented timely filing. | City asserts no estoppel because Montoya suspected a claim and could file with knowledge. | Yes; equitable estoppel applies where misrepresentation blocks filing within the period. |
Key Cases Cited
- Collins v. Gee West Seattle LLC, 631 F.3d 1001 (9th Cir. 2011) (fraudulent concealment principle; defendants should not benefit from wrongdoing)
- Santa Maria v. Pac. Bell, 202 F.3d 1170 (9th Cir. 2000) (focus on defendant's concealment and plaintiff's reliance)
- Stitt v. Williams, 919 F.2d 516 (9th Cir. 1990) (estoppel when defendant's conduct dissuades filing within limitations)
- UA Local 343 v. Nor-Cal Plumbing, Inc., 48 F.3d 1465 (9th Cir. 1994) (distinguishes knowledge of cause of action from knowledge of true facts; fraudulent concealment tolls)
- Bolt v. United States, 944 F.2d 603 (9th Cir. 1991) (affirmative misconduct required when estopping government)