UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
ALEXANDRIA DIVISION
JENNIFER ELISABETH GRIFFIN CASE NO. 25-cv-589
-Vs- JUDGE DRELL
KEVIN LAVESPERE ET AL MAGISTRATE JUDGE PEREZ-MONTES
JUDGMENT
Before the court is pro se petitioner Jennifer Elisabeth Griffin’s civil rights complaint
brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against defendants Kevin Lavespere and the Grant Parish
Sheriff's Office. Griffin alleges that the defendants violated her civil rights by “[flalse
atrest/theft/intimidation June 16, 2021 Pineville, La.”
Rule 12(h)(3) states that “[i]f the court determines at any time that it lacks subject-matter
jurisdiction, the court must dismiss the action.” In cases brought pursuant to Section 1983, federal
courts look to state statutes of limitations to determine the applicable limitations periods. Burge
v. Parish of St. Tammany, 996 F.2d 786, 788 (5th Cir. 1993) (citations omitted). Louisiana’s one-
year prescriptive period applies to this case.' “Although the expiration of a statute of limitations
(or prescription in Louisiana parlance) is an affirmative defense, a district court is authorized to
dismiss a case upon the motion of a litigant or sua sponte when it is clear from the face of the
complaint that the claims asserted are barred by the applicable statute of limitations.” Jackson v.
Standard Mtg. Corp., 2019 WL 6769361 at *6 (W.D. La. Dec. 11, 2019).
Louisiana adopted a two-year statute of limitations which applies to incidents occurring on or after July 1, 2024.
The two-year prescriptive period is not applicable here as the alleged incident occurred in June 2021.
As it is clear from the face of the complaint that the alleged civil rights violation occurred
nearly four years ago, the matter is time barred and the court lacks jurisdiction to hear and
determine the merits of the claim. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that this matter is DISMISSED WITH
PREJUDICE.
gr
THUS DONE AND SIGNED at Alexandria, Louisiana this day of May 2025.
DEE D. DRELL, SENIOR JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Not legal advice. These patterns come from public court records, not ratings of judges as people. They may reflect the types of cases a judge handles, local procedures or other factors, and they do not account for the facts of any individual case. Past patterns do not predict future rulings. Records can be incomplete, months behind current activity, or matched to the wrong person; sealed and confidential cases are not included. Use this as one piece of information, never the sole basis for legal strategy or a recusal motion. Full disclaimer: https://judgefinder.io/legal/disclaimer Read the full disclaimer.