Class Action Tolling

19 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Arneil v. Ramsey
  550 F.2d 774· 2d Cir.· 1977-02-16 ·cited 61×
  The court held that the Washington three-year statute of limitations applies to the federal securities fraud claims, barring them as untimely, and that Section 6 of the Securities Exchange Act does not create a cause of action for investors in member firms.
• FOX v. The Eaton Corp.
  615 F.2d 716· 6th Cir.· 1980-02-21 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the 90-day time period for filing a Title VII claim should not be tolled in this case.
• Soffer v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.
  106 So. 3d 456· Fla. 1st DCA· 2012-10-24 ·cited 31×
  In this Engle-progeny wrongful death case, the court addresses whether class members can pursue punitive damages under negligence and strict liability theories, which were not timely asserted in the original Engle class action. The court holds that progeny plaintiffs cannot asser
• Wood v. Combustion Eng'g, Inc.
  643 F.2d 339· 5th Cir.· 1981-04-24 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the two-year statute of limitations for Texas general fraud applies to federal securities claims, and equitable tolling does not save the claim due to the plaintiffs' delay after opting out of a class action. However, the dismissal of the Texas Blue Sky law cl
• Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. Hallgren
  124 So. 3d 350· Fla. 2d DCA· 2013-10-18 ·cited 17×
  In this appeal of a tobacco liability case, the Second District Court of Appeal affirmed a jury verdict awarding compensatory and punitive damages to the estate of Claire Hallgren, a 60-year smoker who died of lung cancer. The court held that Engle class members pursuing individu
• Glater v. ELI Lilly & Co.
  712 F.2d 735· 1st Cir.· 1983-07-27 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the defendant did not waive its right to raise the personal jurisdiction defense, and the pendency of a class action did not preclude dismissal. The court deferred final decision pending the Supreme Court's ruling in a related case.
• Philip and Dorothy Korwek v. Hunt
  827 F.2d 874· 2d Cir.· 1987-08-26 ·cited 13×
  The American Pipe tolling doctrine does not apply to permit a plaintiff to file a subsequent class action after a definitive determination that class certification is inappropriate.
• Hromyak v. Tyco Int'l Ltd.
  942 So. 2d 1022· Fla. 4th DCA· 2006-12-06 ·cited 11×
  A stockholder sued Tyco International and related defendants in 2002 on federal securities law claims after a 1999 federal class action was dismissed. The court affirmed dismissal on statute of limitations grounds, holding that class action tolling under American Pipe does not ap
• Garrett v. Dep't of Corr.
  589 F. Supp. 2d 1289· M.D. Fla.· 2007-06-20 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the defendant employer could be liable for inmate sexual harassment of an employee, and that the employee's claims were not barred by untimeliness due to piggybacking on prior class action charges.
• Andrews v. Verne ORR
  851 F.2d 146· 6th Cir.· 1988-06-30 ·cited 7×
  The court held that while the pendency of prior class actions tolled the limitations period for individual administrative complaints, the plaintiffs' belief that tolling continued until the prior case's settlement was reasonable, justifying equitable tolling for their untimely fi
• Hood v. NEW Jersey Dep't OF Civil Serv.
  680 F.2d 955· 3d Cir.· 1982-06-10 ·cited 6×
  The dissent argues that the case should be remanded to the district court for further proceedings on both the Title VII and § 1981 claims.
• Robbin v. Fluor Corp. & Fluor Acquisition Corp.
  835 F.2d 213· 9th Cir.· 1987-12-28 ·cited 4×
  The commencement of a class action tolls the statute of limitations for all asserted members of the class who would have been parties, but this tolling does not extend to subsequent class actions filed by class members. State tolling doctrines do not necessarily apply when state
• Concordia Coll. Corp. v. W.R. Grace & Co.
  999 F.2d 326· 8th Cir.· 1993-07-14 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiff's asbestos abatement cost recovery action was barred by the statute of repose and was not revived by the asbestos revival statute because it was not timely begun. The court also held that class action tolling did not apply to the revival statute.
• Tosti v. City OF LOS Angeles
  754 F.2d 1485· 9th Cir.· 1985-03-04 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Supreme Court's decision in Monell v. New York City Department of Social Services applies retroactively to discriminatory acts predating the decision, and that the statute of limitations was tolled by the pendency of a related class action.
• Mitchell v. Osceola Farms Co.
  408 F. Supp. 2d 1275· S.D. Fla.· 2005-12-29 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the statute of limitations for the class action claims was not tolled, but it was tolled for individual claims, and federal question jurisdiction existed for those individual claims.
• Chaverri v. Dole Food Co., Inc.
  Del.· 2021-01-12
  The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed the Superior Court's order denying the plaintiffs' motion to vacate a prior dismissal order. The Court held that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate extraordinary circumstances justifying relief under Rule 60(b)(6) and that their motion was un
• Abdur Rahaman
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2016-05-04
  The Delaware Superior Court granted defendants' motion to dismiss, holding that plaintiffs' claims for negligence and wrongful death were time-barred under Bangladesh's one-year statute of limitations and that plaintiffs failed to state a prima facie case for negligence because d
• In re Nine Sys. Corp. S'holders Litig. Consol. C.A. No. 3940-VCN
  Del. Ch.· 2014-09-04
  The Delaware Court of Chancery held that while the recapitalization was approved at a fair price, the process was grossly unfair, constituting a breach of fiduciary duty by the control group and conflicted directors. The court found that the plaintiffs had standing to bring direc
• In & for New Castle Cnty. Jose Rufino Canales Blanco v. Amvac Chem. Corp.
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2012-08-08
  The Delaware statute of limitations was tolled by the pendency of a class action in another jurisdiction, and the plaintiff's claim is not barred. The court rejected arguments against cross-jurisdictional tolling, a mass tort exception, and the finality of a prior federal forum n