Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Before
Howard, Selya and Lipez,
Circuit Judges.
the
injury
occurred
or
was
discovered)."
Black's
Law
the
time
prescribed
by
the
applicable
statute
of
See A.G.
ex rel. Maddox v. Elsevier, Inc., 732 F.3d 77, 79 (1st Cir. 2013);
SEC v. Tambone, 597 F.3d 436, 438 (1st Cir. 2010) (en banc).
In 2009, the plaintiff worked for the Parole Board of
Puerto Rico, but economic forces placed her employment in jeopardy.
That spring, the Puerto Rico legislature enacted a series of
with
less
than
13.5
years
of
service
were
to
be
terminated.
Despite its harshness, Law 7 had a few oases of job
security.
(e.g.,
police
and
additional oases.
fire).
An
amendment
to
the
law
created
8797(m).
In light of this amendment, the plaintiff believed that
she would be shielded from the adverse effects of Law 7.
Her hopes
were dashed when, less than four months later, she received a
letter from the body charged with implementing Law 7 (the Junta de
Reestructuracin
Estabilizacin
Econmica
Fiscal
(JREF))
protests.
The
process
culminated
in
final
-3-
February 3, 2011.
Although the plaintiff was reinstated to her position,
the pot continued to boil.
28
U.S.C.
1331,
and
alleged
that
the
JREF's
members,
punitive damages.
The defendants moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing
that the plaintiff's section 1983 claim was time-barred.
The
district court agreed and dismissed the section 1983 claim with
prejudice.
equivalent of a state.
Cir. 2008).
the
action
is
based."
Id.
(internal
quotation
marks
omitted).
In Puerto Rico, the borrowed limitations period is one
year.
held that the plaintiff's section 1983 claim accrued no later than
February of 2010, when the plaintiff received the final termination
letter.
-5-
But
-6-
See Patsy
v. Bd. of Regents, 457 U.S. 496, 516 (1982); Rogers v. Okin, 738
F.2d 1, 5 (1st Cir. 1984).
354
F.3d
at
97
(internal
quotation
marks
omitted).
The plaintiff's reliance on this principle elevates hope
over reason.
Id.
The two
actions "must seek the same form of relief"; they "must be based on
the same substantive claims"; and they "must be asserted against
the same defendants in the same capacities."
-7-
Id. at 98.
The
Thus, it is nose-on-the-face
plain that the two actions did not seek the "same form of relief."
We hasten to add that this conclusion breaks no new
ground.
Puerto Rico law, "seeking only equitable relief does not toll the
statute of limitations where the subsequent complaint . . . seeks
damages."
must
requirement.
satisfy
all
three
facets
of
the
identicality
-8-
independent
finding
that
her
dismissal
was
unlawful.
It is hard to follow
advanced this theory for the first time in her reply brief. Blackletter law holds that, in the absence of exceptional circumstances,
arguments presented for the first time in an appellant's reply
brief are deemed waived. See Sandstrom v. ChemLawn Corp., 904 F.2d
83, 87 (1st Cir. 1990).
here.
-9-
We need go no further.3
Puleio v. Vose,
Affirmed.