Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Mohammad G. Abas sued the City of Plano, the Plano Police Department, and Officers Russell Harris and Jamaal Kemp under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of his Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights during an October 1, 2022 incident.
Abas filed the action on April 16, 2025. The district court dismissed his claims with prejudice because Texas’s two-year personal-injury limitations period had expired. On appeal, Abas acknowledged that his suit was untimely but argued that equitable tolling should apply because his criminal defense attorney advised him to wait until the related criminal proceedings concluded before filing a civil action.
The Court’s Holding
The Fifth Circuit affirmed. It first held that Abas forfeited his equitable-tolling argument by inadequately briefing it: his appellate brief contained no citations to the record and no legal authority supporting his position, contrary to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 28(a)(8)(A).
The court also concluded that the argument failed on the merits. Because Texas’s two-year limitations period governed the § 1983 claims, Texas equitable-tolling principles applied. Texas courts invoke equitable tolling sparingly, including where an adversary’s misconduct causes a deadline to pass, but Abas alleged no fraudulent concealment or other misconduct by the defendants. The court found no Texas authority permitting tolling because a plaintiff delayed filing based on an attorney’s advice and concluded that the equities did not favor tolling.
Key Takeaways
- A § 1983 claim arising in Texas is generally subject to Texas’s two-year personal-injury limitations period.
- An appellant may forfeit an argument by failing to support it with citations to legal authority and relevant portions of the record.
- Advice from a plaintiff’s attorney to delay filing, without misconduct by the defendants, did not warrant equitable tolling under Texas law.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that related criminal proceedings do not automatically pause the limitations period for a civil-rights action. Plaintiffs considering § 1983 claims must protect the civil filing deadline even when criminal proceedings remain pending.
It also illustrates the independent importance of appellate briefing requirements: the Fifth Circuit found forfeiture before explaining that the tolling argument would fail on its merits in any event.