Matter of Jonathan R.F.-C. (Virgilio D.O.)

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that continuing violation doctrine did not apply to rent increases approved outside statute of limitations period even though plaintiffs continued to pay those increased rents during the limitations period
• affirming dismissal of referred to the same unique identifying number assigned Section 1983 procedural due process claims
• affirming a district court’s refusal to equitably toll the statute of limitations and grant of a motion to dismiss on statute of limitations grounds
• “Where … plaintiffs complain of ‘discrete acts’ separated in time, the usual limitations rule applies.”
• “a claim alleging an ongoing policy or practice accrues at the time of the last action in furtherance of it”
• “The 4 Plaintiff does not argue that equitable tolling should apply to his claims. See generally Dkt. No. 15; Doe v. United States, 76 F.4th 64, 71 (2d Cir. 2023

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).