Michelle Nicole Evans v. Daniel North
16-0288
| W. Va. | Oct 17, 2017Background
- On March 7, 2012, Michelle Evans alleges she was stopped by Martinsburg police and subjected to excessive force causing injury.
- Evans originally sued the officers and the City in federal court under 42 U.S.C. § 1983; after discovery she asked the district court to remand or allow amendment to state claims.
- The district court, lacking remand power, construed her request as a motion to voluntarily dismiss under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41 and dismissed the case without prejudice on September 16, 2014; Evans did not appeal.
- Evans filed a new action in Berkeley County Circuit Court on September 15, 2015 (more than two years after the incident), asserting assault and battery and adding the Martinsburg Police Department and a new claim about a “rogue’s gallery.”
- The circuit court dismissed Evans’s state suit as barred by West Virginia’s two-year statute of limitations for personal injury actions (W. Va. Code § 55-2-12), finding the prior federal dismissal was voluntary and thus the one-year savings statute (§ 55-2-18(a)) did not apply.
- The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed, holding the savings statute does not protect suits voluntarily dismissed in federal court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether West Virginia’s savings statute (§ 55-2-18(a)) tolls limitations after the federal dismissal | Evans: Her federal case was not voluntarily dismissed; she sought remand, so § 55-2-18(a) should allow refiling within one year | Respondents: The federal court treated her request as a voluntary dismissal under Rule 41; voluntary dismissals are excluded from the savings statute | Held: Dismissal was voluntary; savings statute does not apply; state suit time-barred |
| Whether the circuit court could revisit the federal court’s characterization of the dismissal | Evans: Circuit court should consider her intent, not the federal court’s recharacterization | Respondents: Federal court’s order controls; circuit court lacked jurisdiction to alter it | Held: Circuit court properly relied on the federal dismissal as voluntary; no authority to reverse district court order |
Key Cases Cited
- Henthorn v. Collins, 118 S.E.2d 358 (W. Va. 1961) (savings statute does not apply where prior dismissal was voluntary)
- McClung v. Tieche, 29 S.E.2d 250 (W. Va. 1944) (statute of limitations not tolled after plaintiff’s voluntary dismissal)
- Armor v. Michelin Tire Corp., 923 F. Supp. 103 (S.D. W. Va. 1996) (recognizing that voluntarily dismissed actions are not saved by West Virginia’s savings statute)