Jesse L. Allen & Constance G. Allen v. Lee A. Gifford & Charles R. Samuels, 462 F.2d 615 (4th Cir. 1972). · Go Syfert
Search
Jesse L. Allen & Constance G. Allen v. Lee A. Gifford & Charles R. Samuels, 462 F.2d 615 (4th Cir. 1972). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
38 citation events (1 in the last 25 years) across 11 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Bradley v. Carydale Enter., 707 F. Supp. 217 (E.D. Va. 1989)
Treatment trajectory · 1973 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1973 1999 2026
How cited ↗
Cited for
At page 615 cited at this page2 citing cases
  • Bradley v. Carydale Enter., 707 F. Supp. 217 (E.D. Va. 1989).published
    Co., 530 F.2d 539, 541 (4th Cir.1975) (Section 1981 suit); Allen v. Gifford, 462 F.2d 615, 615 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 876 , 93 S.Ct. 128 , 34 L.Ed.2d 130 (1972) (Section 1982 suit); Harris v. Obenshain, 452 F.Supp. 1172, 1176-7…
  • W.M. Scheerer v. Rose State Coll. Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n, Donald Burris, & Evan Kemp, 950 F.2d 661 (10th Cir. 1991).published
    July 2, 1991) (post- Wilson and Goodman decision holding that § 1982 is sufficiently analogous to § 1981 and § 1983 to warrant use of the same limitations period); see also Allen v. Gifford, 462 F.2d 615, 615 (4th Cir.) (pre-Wilson decisio…
Other citing cases6 with no pin cite or quoted language on record
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Jesse L. ALLEN and Constance G. Allen, Appellants,
v.
Lee A. GIFFORD and Charles R. Samuels, Appellees
72-1234.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
Jun 21, 1972.
Published opinion
462 F.2d 615
1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 8856
Filmore E. Rose, Norfolk, Va. (Stanley E. Sacks and Sacks, Sacks & Tavss, Norfolk, Va., on brief), for appellants., Norris E. Halpern, Norfolk, Va. (Gordon E. Campbell and Campbell, Lustig & Hancock, Norfolk, Va., on brief), for ap-pellees.
Butzner, Russell, Field.
Cited by 32 opinions  |  Published
PER CURIAM:

Jesse L. Allen and Constance G. Allen appeal from an order of the district court which held that their complaint charging racial discrimination in the sale of real estate in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1982 was barred by Virginia’s one-year statute of limitations. The complaint, which seeks compensatory and punitive damages, alleges that the Allens suffered humiliation, emotional stress, and anxiety when the defendants initially refused to sell them a house. Later the Al-lens succeeded in purchasing a home in the subdivision the defendants were developing.

While this appeal was pending, we held, in Almond v. Kent, 459 F.2d 200 (4th Cir., 1972), that the state’s two-year statute applies to actions brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for personal injuries. Both § 1982 and § 1983 were enacted to redress the infringement of civil rights. Both allow the recovery of damages for personal wrongs. We conclude, therefore, that the reasons stated in Almond for applying Virginia’s two-year statute of limitations to actions under § 1983 make the same limitation period appropriate for personal injury suits based on § 1982.

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is vacated, and this ease is remanded for further proceedings. Each party shall bear his own costs.