IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
_____________________
No. 96-30621
Summary Calendar
_____________________
NATHANIEL JOSEPH,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
CITY OF NEW ORLEANS;
CHARLES ALONZO,
Defendants-Appellees.
_________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Louisiana
USDC No. 95-CV-248-R
_________________________________________________________________
July 30, 1997
Before KING, JOLLY, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Nathaniel Joseph, Jr. filed a pro se complaint in federal
court against various defendants asserting that his federal
constitutional rights were violated when he was arrested and tried
for the armed robbery wrongly. See Joseph v. Cannon, 609 So.2d
838, 839-40 (La. App. 1992)(state law claims). The district court
granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants because
Joseph’s federal claims had prescribed.
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that
this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
As no federal statute of limitations applies to § 1983
actions, federal courts borrow the forum state’s general personal
injury limitations period, which is one year in Louisiana. Davis
v. Louisiana State Univ., 876 F.2d 412, 413 (5th Cir. 1989); La.
Civ. Code Ann. art. 3492 (West 1994). In this case there is no
dispute that Joseph knew that he had suffered an injury at the time
of his acquittal on October 17, 1986. There is also no dispute
that he did not file a lawsuit encompassing his federal
constitutional claims until January 20, 1995. Accordingly, the
filing of the suit in state court alleging only state law claims on
January 30, 1987, did not interrupt the prescriptive period with
respect to the federal claims. Ford v. Stone, 599 F.Supp. 693,
694-96 (M.D. La. 1984), aff’d 774 F.2d 1158 (5th Cir.
1985)(unpublished). The district court did not err in granting
summary judgment and dismissing Joseph’s federal claims as
prescribed.
A F F I R M E D.
-2-