James A. Williams v. Chester E. Strand

Ninth Circuit

James A. Williams v. Chester E. Strand

239 F.2d 151, 16 Alaska 512, 1956 U.S. App. LEXIS 4149

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedNovember 9, 1956

Docket15206_1

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 239 F.2d 151 (James A. Williams v. Chester E. Strand) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

James A. Williams v. Chester E. Strand, 239 F.2d 151, 16 Alaska 512, 1956 U.S. App. LEXIS 4149 (9th Cir. 1956).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Williams appeals from an order of the district court dismissing his complaint seeking damages for his imprisonment arising from the claimed perjury of Strand in the sworn criminal complaint against Williams, claiming the complaint stated falsely that appellant had given Strand on July 6, 1953 a bad check for $153.24, feloniously and with intent to defraud Strand. The complaint was filed February 4, 1956, next after Williams’ complaint in the case of Williams v. Mc-Nealy, 9 Cir., 239 F.2d 150.

As in that case, the Alaska statute, 3 A.C.L.A. § 55-2-7, limiting the period during which suit can be brought for such a tort to two years, is applicable. Williams here makes the same claim of the tolling of the statute by the provisions of 3 A.C.L.A., 1949, § 55-2-15, which statute is inapplicable for the reason stated in Williams v. McNealy, supra.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Williams appeals from an order of the district court dismissing his complaint seeking damages for his imprisonment arising from the claimed perjury of Strand in the sworn criminal complaint against Williams, claiming the complaint stated falsely that appellant had given Strand on July 6, 1953 a bad check for $153.24, feloniously and with intent to defraud Strand. The complaint was filed February 4, 1956, next after Williams’ complaint in the case of Williams v. Mc-Nealy, 9 Cir., 239 F.2d 150.

As in that case, the Alaska statute, 3 A.C.L.A. § 55-2-7, limiting the period during which suit can be brought for such a tort to two years, is applicable. Williams here makes the same claim of the tolling of the statute by the provisions of 3 A.C.L.A., 1949, § 55-2-15, which statute is inapplicable for the reason stated in Williams v. McNealy, supra.

The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

239 F.2d 151, 16 Alaska 512, 1956 U.S. App. LEXIS 4149, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/james-a-williams-v-chester-e-strand-ca9-1956.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack