Court Opinion

ID: 2964443
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:25:42.799946+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:11:17.093304
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

                                 ____________________

        No. 96-1039

                              CARLOS R. RIVERA-CARBANA,

                                Plaintiff, Appellant,

                                          v.

                               DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY,

                                 Defendant, Appellee.

                                 ____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                           FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

                    [Hon. Hector M. Laffitte, U.S. District Judge]
                                              ___________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                                Torruella, Chief Judge,
                                           ___________
                            Cyr and Stahl, Circuit Judges.
                                           ______________

                                 ____________________

            Carlos R. Rivera-Carbana on brief pro se.
            ________________________
            Guillermo  Gil, United States Attorney, and Fidel A. Sevillano Del
            ______________                              ______________________
        Rio, Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellee.
        ___

                                 ____________________

                                   November 7, 1996
                                 ____________________

                 Per Curiam.   Pro se plaintiff  Carlos R. Rivera-Carbana
                 __________    ___ __

            appeals a district court judgment dismissing his Federal Tort

            Claims  action on  the  grounds that  plaintiff's claims  for

            personal   injuries  arising  out  alleged  acts  of  medical

            malpractice were  "forever barred" under 28  U.S.C.   2401(b)

            and an unrelated claim for property damage to  his automobile

            had been waived.1   Plaintiff also appeals a subsequent order
                            1

            that denied his motion  to reconsider the foregoing judgment.

                 This court  has thoroughly  reviewed the record  and the

            parties'  briefs on  appeal.   We  conclude that  plaintiff's

            personal injury claims were  properly dismissed because  they

            are  barred by the statute of limitations.   Plaintiff failed

            to present  these claims   within  two years  of the  date of

            their accrual, as required by 28 U.S.C.   2401(b).  Plaintiff

            has  also failed to present  a cogent argument addressing his

            property  damage claim on appeal.   Thus, we  deem it waived.

            See Barrett v. United States, 965 F.2d 1184, 1194 n. 19  (1st
            ___ _______    _____________

            Cir. 1992).  Accordingly,  the judgment of dismissal  and the

            order  denying  plaintiff's  motion  for  reconsideration are

            affirmed.
            ________

                                
            ____________________

               1In relevant part, 28 U.S.C.   2401(b) provides that, "[a]
               1
            tort claim against the United States shall be  forever barred
            unless  it is presented in writing to the appropriate Federal
            agency within two years after such claim accrues ...."

                                         -2-