Arnold C. Watson v. Commercial Credit Corporation

Fifth Circuit

Arnold C. Watson v. Commercial Credit Corporation

341 F.2d 915, 1965 U.S. App. LEXIS 6464

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 23, 1965

Docket21939_1

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 341 F.2d 915 (Arnold C. Watson v. Commercial Credit Corporation) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Arnold C. Watson v. Commercial Credit Corporation, 341 F.2d 915, 1965 U.S. App. LEXIS 6464 (5th Cir. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The appellant, Arnold C. Watson, brought suit against Commercial Credit Corporation and several individuals alleging, in somewhat ambiguous but probably sufficient language, false arrest, false imprisonment and malicious prosecution, originating in a criminal conviction in a state court of Louisiana. The district court concluded that the Louisiana statute of prescription 1 was applicable and, the prescriptive period of one year having run, the action was barred. A summary judgment for the defendants, appellees here, was granted.

Whether the claims asserted were founded on the substantive law of Louisiana or under the Federal law, the law *916 of prescription of Louisiana fixes the time within which the action must be brought. That period, under the Louisiana law, is one year. The time having run before the suit was commenced, it cannot be maintained. The judgment of the district court is

Affirmed.

1

. “The following actions are also prescribed by one year:

“That * * * resulting from offenses or quasi offenses.” LSA-Civ.Code Art. 3536.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

The appellant, Arnold C. Watson, brought suit against Commercial Credit Corporation and several individuals alleging, in somewhat ambiguous but probably sufficient language, false arrest, false imprisonment and malicious prosecution, originating in a criminal conviction in a state court of Louisiana. The district court concluded that the Louisiana statute of prescription 1 was applicable and, the prescriptive period of one year having run, the action was barred. A summary judgment for the defendants, appellees here, was granted.

Whether the claims asserted were founded on the substantive law of Louisiana or under the Federal law, the law *916 of prescription of Louisiana fixes the time within which the action must be brought. That period, under the Louisiana law, is one year. The time having run before the suit was commenced, it cannot be maintained. The judgment of the district court is

Affirmed.

1

. “The following actions are also prescribed by one year:

“That * * * resulting from offenses or quasi offenses.” LSA-Civ.Code Art. 3536.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

341 F.2d 915, 1965 U.S. App. LEXIS 6464, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/arnold-c-watson-v-commercial-credit-corporation-ca5-1965.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack