Opinion
22-1967
02-23-2023
ARLENE CLAIBORNE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. LIBERTY MUTUAL COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellee, FRANKLIN W. WOODS; C.E. LONGEST TIMBERLANDS LLC, a/k/a Mapledale, LLC; CARY E. LONGEST, Defendants-Appellees.
Arlene Claiborne, Appellant Pro Se. Joshua B. Goodwin, HARMAN CLAYTOR CORRIGAN &WELLMAN, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
UNPUBLISHED
Submitted: February 21, 2023
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, Senior District Judge. (3:22-cv-00345-HEH)
Arlene Claiborne, Appellant Pro Se.
Joshua B. Goodwin, HARMAN CLAYTOR CORRIGAN &WELLMAN, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
Before NIEMEYER and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM
Arlene Claiborne appeals the district court's order dismissing her civil diversity suit, in which she sought damages for injuries resulting from a car accident, as barred by the applicable two-year statute of limitations in Va. Code Ann. § 8.01-243(A) (2022). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
The district court noted that the Supreme Court of Virginia tolled all statutes of limitations between March 16, 2020, and July 19, 2020, because of COVID-19 but concluded that the tolling provision did not apply because the two-year period for Claiborne to file her suit ended on June 26, 2021. After the district court found that the COVID-19 tolling provisions did not apply to Claiborne's case, the Court of Appeals of Virginia held that the "tolling provisions were not limited to deadlines that otherwise would have expired" between March 16, 2020, and July 19, 2020. English v. Quinn, 880 S.E.2d 35, 39 (Va. Ct. App. 2022). Giving Claiborne the benefit of English, she had until Monday, November 1, 2021, to file her claims. Therefore, her complaint-filed on April 28, 2022- is still barred by the statute of limitations.
Accordingly, we affirm the district court's order. Claiborne v. Liberty Mut. Co., No. 3:22-cv-00345-HEH (E.D. Va. Aug. 24, 2022). We deny Claiborne's motion for the appointment of counsel and her motion for oral argument and/or an arbitration hearing. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED