Opinion ID: 1358526
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Captain Swartz and Corrections Officer Little

Text: The complaint alleged that Corrections Officer Little injured Shomo by grabbing and pulling him against the bars of a jail cell on March 11, 2000. The district court properly characterized the facts as alleging an assault that cannot be construed as part of a deliberate medical indifference claim, and to which the continuing violation doctrine would not apply. [2] Because the alleged assault occurred more than three years before filing of the complaint, the assault claim is time-barred and was properly dismissed with prejudice. The complaint also alleged a single incident on September 7, 1999, in which Captain Swartz handcuffed Shomo to another prisoner, contrary to an order that Shomo be handcuffed at the waist with a belt, resulting in Shomo's injuring his left arm. The continuing violation doctrine does not apply to the claim against Swartz because there is no indication that Shomo is able to allege acts involving Swartz that fall within the three-year statutory period. The claim against Swartz relating to the September 7, 1999 incident was properly dismissed as untimely. However, because the handcuffing is alleged to have been in contravention of medical orders, the Swartz incident may still be relevant to any claim against the City.