Lyle M Hanzlick v. Brooke Rollins

Opinion

1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

9 Lyle M Hanzlick, No. CV-25-00623-TUC-SHR

10 Plaintiff, ORDER

11 v.

12 Brooke Rollins,

13 Defendant. 14 15 16 Pending before the Court is Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss filed pursuant to Federal 17 Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). (Doc. 8.) The Motion is fully briefed. (Docs. 11, 12.) 18 For the following reasons, the Court will grant the Motion. 19 I. Background 20 The Federal Crop Insurance Act (FCIA) was enacted in 1938 to “promote the 21 national welfare by improving the economic stability of agriculture through a sound system 22 of crop insurance.” 7 U.S.C. § 1502(a). To carry out its purpose, Congress chartered the 23 Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC). 7 U.S.C. § 1503. In 1982, Plaintiff was a 24 farmer in Cochise County with 37.1 acres of cotton insured under an FCIC policy. (Doc. 25 1 at 1.) On September 1, 1982, Plaintiff filed an insurance claim with the FCIC for damages 26 to his crop from cold, wind, rain, and hail. (Doc. 1 at 1.) At some point prior to May 10, 27 1989, the FCIC informed Plaintiff his claim had been rejected and his administrative appeal 28 rights were exhausted. (Doc. 1-1 at 2.) 1 In November 2025, Plaintiff filed the instant Complaint against Defendant Brooke 2 Rollins, Secretary of the United States Department of Agriculture. (Doc. 1.) Defendant 3 subsequently moved to dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint for failure to comply with the time 4 limitations under the FCIA and failure to state a claim. (Doc. 8.) 5 II. Legal Standard 6 On a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), allegations of material fact are assumed 7 to be true and construed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. Cousins v. 8 Lockyer, 568 F.3d 1063, 1067 (9th Cir. 2009). “A claim has facial plausibility when the 9 plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that 10 the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 11 (2009). If the court finds a plaintiff does not allege enough facts to support a cognizable 12 legal theory, the court may dismiss the claim. SmileCare Dental Grp. v. Delta Dental Plan 13 of Cal., Inc., 88 F.3d 780, 783 (9th Cir. 1996). “Dismissal without leave to amend is 14 improper unless it is clear, upon de novo review, that the complaint could not be saved by 15 any amendment.” Polich v. Burlington N., Inc., 942 F.2d 1467, 1472 (9th Cir. 1991). 16 A statute-of-limitations defense may be raised in a Rule 12(b)(6) motion only if the 17 running of the statute is apparent on the face of the complaint. Huynh v. Chase Manhattan 18 Bank, 465 F.3d 992, 997 (9th Cir. 2006). “A motion to dismiss based on the running of 19 the statute of limitations period may be granted only ‘if the assertions of the complaint, 20 read with the required liberality, would not permit the plaintiff to prove that the statute was 21 tolled.’” Supermail Cargo, Inc. v. United States, 68 F.3d 1204, 1206 (9th Cir. 1995) 22 (quotation omitted). Where a party alleges in a motion to dismiss that an action is barred 23 under the statute of limitations, the Court’s task is only to determine whether the claimant 24 has pleaded facts showing the claim is time barred. See Smith ex rel. Estates of Boston 25 Chicken, Inc. v. Arthur Andersen L.L.P., 175 F. Supp. 2d 1180, 1198 (D. Ariz. 2001). 26 “A statute of limitations defense . . . is not ‘jurisdictional.’” See Day v. McDonough, 27 547 U.S. 198, 205 (2006). “[A] nonjurisdictional federal statute of limitations is normally 28 subject to . . . equitable tolling.” Holland v. Florida, 560 U.S. 631, 645–46 (quoting Irwin 1 v. Dep’t of Veteran Affairs, 498 U.S. 89, 95–96 (1990)). To obtain relief via equitable 2 tolling, a plaintiff must establish “extraordinary circumstances” that were “beyond 3 [plaintiff’s] control[, making] it impossible to file the claims on time.” White v. Aurora 4 Loan Servs. LLC, No. CV-14-01021-PHX-JAT, 2016 WL 3653958, at *4 (D. Ariz. July 6, 5 2016) (quoting McCloud v. State, 170 P.3d 691, 696 (Ariz. App. 2007)). “Courts take a 6 flexible, fact-specific approach to equitable tolling.” Gibbs v. Legrand, 767 F.3d 879, 885 7 (9th Cir. 2014). 8 III. Discussion 9 Under the FCIA, lawsuits brought against the FCIC based on its denial of insurance 10 claims must be “brought within one year of the date the denial of the claim is mailed and 11 received by the claimant.” Edmonds v. Federal Crop Ins. Corp., 684 F. Supp. 656, 657 12 (N.D. Ala. 1988); see 7 U.S.C. § 1508(j)(2)(B). Any claim not served within this statute 13 of limitations is barred. Id. 14 Here, Plaintiff’s Complaint alleges he is entitled to “payment with interest and 15 liquidated damages” related to his 1982 crop insurance claim. (Doc. 1 at 1.) 16 Communications attached to Plaintiff’s Complaint establish the FCIC informed Plaintiff 17 his claim had been denied at some point before May 10, 1989. (Doc. 1-1 at 2.) Thus, as 18 of that date, at the latest, Plaintiff had written notice of the denial and was required to file 19 suit no later than May 10, 1990. Plaintiff did not file his Complaint until November 2025, 20 over 35 years after the deadline imposed under the FCIA. As such, Plaintiff’s claims under 21 the FCIC are time barred under § 1508(j)(2). To the extent Plaintiff seeks equitable tolling, 22 Plaintiff’s Complaint is devoid of factual allegations warranting equitable tolling of the 23 one-year statute of limitations. Because the statute of limitations has expired for Plaintiff’s 24 cause of action and leave to amend would be futile, the Court will grant Defendant’s 25 Motion to Dismiss with prejudice. See Polich, 942 F.2d at 1472. 26 IV. Conclusion 27 IT IS ORDERED Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 8) is GRANTED. 28 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Plaintiff’s Complaint (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, and the Clerk of Court shall close this case. 2 Dated this 26th day of June, 2026. 3

5 Honorable Scott H. Rash 6 United States District Judge 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

-4-