Varnell v. Dora Consolidated School District
2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 12383
10th Cir.2014Background
- Plaintiff Tori Varnell alleges repeated sexual abuse by coach Amber Shaw from ~Jan 2005 (7th grade) until late 2006/early 2007 (9th grade); abuse ended when Shaw resigned.
- Varnell disclosed the abuse to a spiritual mentor in 2010 and told her mother on July 12, 2010; a state grand jury later indicted Shaw.
- Varnell sued Shaw, Dora Consolidated School District, and Superintendent Barron on May 24, 2012 (age 20) asserting § 1983 claims, Title IX, and state tort claims; defendants removed to federal court.
- Defendants moved to dismiss as time-barred; the magistrate’s recommendation was converted to summary judgment: federal claims dismissed as untimely, state claims dismissed without prejudice, and motion to amend denied as futile.
- Varnell appealed, arguing various tolling theories (child-sexual-abuse statute, minority/incapacity, fraudulent concealment), later accrual due to delayed discovery of psychological injury, error in dismissing state claims rather than remanding, and error denying leave to amend.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Applicable limitations period for § 1983 and Title IX claims | Use NM child-sexual-abuse statute §37-1-30(A) (later accrual/tolling) | Federal claims borrow NM general personal-injury limitations (3 years); child-abuse statute not generally applicable | Court: borrow NM general 3-year tort statute (N.M. Stat. Ann. §37-1-8); §37-1-30 not applicable to federal claims |
| Tolling for minority and incapacity | Tolling extends limitations; Varnell was incapacitated and thus tolled past age 19 | Minority tolling applies but incapacity not established by evidence | Court: minority tolling applied but Varnell filed at age 20; no evidence of legal incapacity so no further tolling under §37-1-10 |
| Equitable tolling / fraudulent concealment | Barron concealed abuse (from mother and others), so concealment tolled limitations | Any concealment by Barron does not excuse Varnell’s failure to sue after reaching majority; argument not preserved below regarding concealment from mother | Court: General fraudulent-concealment tolling exists, but Varnell forfeited the concealment-from-mother theory; no preserved basis to toll beyond minority |
| Accrual date of federal claims (discovery rule) | Claims did not accrue until ~2010 when she appreciated full psychological injury | Accrual follows federal law: claim accrues when plaintiff can file and obtain relief; battery analogy accrues when last abusive act occurred | Court: Accrual no later than last abuse (late 2006/early 2007); delayed realization of injury does not postpone accrual |
| Disposition of state-law claims after federal dismissal | Remand to state court or dismissal without prejudice harms statute-of-limitations rights | District court may decline supplemental jurisdiction and dismiss without prejudice; §1367(d) tolls limitations while claims pending and for 30 days after dismissal | Court: Dismissal without prejudice was proper; §1367(d) preserves Varnell’s time to refile in state court |
| Denial of leave to amend as futile | Proposed amendments would raise timely federal claims or otherwise save the case | New federal claims would be time-barred for same reasons; state claims would be dismissed after federal claims | Court: Denial proper; Varnell failed to show amended federal claims would be timely and amendment would be futile |
Key Cases Cited
- Wilson v. Garcia, 471 U.S. 261 (U.S. 1985) (federal civil-rights actions borrow state personal-injury limitations and related tolling rules)
- Owens v. Okure, 488 U.S. 235 (U.S. 1989) (when multiple state limitations exist, borrow general/residual personal-injury statute)
- Wallace v. Kato, 549 U.S. 384 (U.S. 2007) (federal-law accrual governed by common-law tort principles; accrual when plaintiff can file and obtain relief)
- Merrifield v. Bd. of Cnty. Comm’rs, 654 F.3d 1073 (10th Cir. 2011) (standard of review for summary judgment)
- Blake v. Dickason, 997 F.2d 749 (10th Cir. 1993) (state child-abuse limitation not applicable to § 1983 claims)
- Bonneau v. Centennial Sch. Dist. No. 28J, 666 F.3d 577 (9th Cir. 2012) (declining to apply state child-abuse statute to § 1983 timeliness)
- Baker v. Bd. of Regents, 991 F.2d 628 (10th Cir. 1993) (limitations/borrowing principles applied to Title VI and analogous civil-rights claims)