Equitable Tolling

1,372 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Brennan v. Daley
  929 F.2d 346· 7th Cir.· 1991-04-08
  The court held that the statute of limitations for a Shakman claim was equitably tolled until the plaintiff discovered the key fact that the favored applicant had applied nearly a year after the deadline.
• Banta v. Sullivan
  925 F.2d 343· 9th Cir.· 1991-02-06
  The Appeals Council's review of a claimant's submission of additional evidence to determine if it warrants reconsideration does not extend the time for filing a district court action.
• Harris v. Adm'r, Veterans Admin.
  924 F.2d 148· 8th Cir.· 1991-01-23
  The court held that the EEOC did not abuse its discretion in refusing to extend the filing deadline for an administrative appeal, and therefore summary judgment for the defendant was appropriate.
• Ripplinger v. Amoco OIL Co.
  916 F.2d 441· 8th Cir.· 1990-10-10
  The court held that the one-year statute of limitations under the Petroleum Marketing Practices Act barred the plaintiff's claim because it was filed after the statutory deadline.
• Barrs v. Louis W. Sullivan, M.D.
  906 F.2d 120· 5th Cir.· 1990-06-12
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to reinstate the case, as the plaintiff failed to timely file his action and did not demonstrate sufficient grounds for equitable tolling or relief under Rule 60(b).
• Stewart v. Dep't OF Corr. & Pub. Emps. Relations Comm'n (interested party)
  561 So. 2d 15· Fla. 4th DCA· 1990-05-09
  The trial court erred in not applying the doctrine of equitable tolling when appellant's attorney filed a notice of appeal one business day late.
• Vaughn L. Peete v. Am. Standard Graphic
  885 F.2d 331· 6th Cir.· 1989-09-19
  Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(e) does not extend the ninety-day period for filing a Title VII suit when the right-to-sue letter is mailed to the plaintiff.
• Gomez v. Gov't OF the Virgin Islands
  882 F.2d 733· 3d Cir.· 1989-08-10
  The court held that the Virgin Islands Public Employee Labor Relations Act (PELRA) governs hybrid contract/fair representation actions, and the general Virgin Islands statutes of limitations apply, not the federal six-month period.
• Zavala v. United States
  876 F.2d 780· 9th Cir.· 1989-06-05
  The court held that the Federal Tort Claims Act statute of limitations cannot be tolled for a minor plaintiff whose parent, despite alleged abandonment, had a duty and knowledge to file a claim within the statutory period.
• Peterson v. Fuller Co.
  807 F.2d 151· 8th Cir.· 1986-12-17
  Product liability actions are barred by the statute of repose when the injury occurs more than ten years after the product was first sold, and equitable tolling is unavailable in such cases.
• In re Roanca Realty v. Roanca Realty, Inc.
  747 F.2d 816· 1st Cir.· 1984-11-07
  The court held that the appellants' failure to file their appeal within the ten-day limit prescribed by Bankruptcy Rule 802(a) was not excused by a claim of lack of notice, as they had sufficient actual knowledge of the proceedings.
• Lambrecht v. Ford Motor Co.
  729 F.2d 1162· 8th Cir.· 1984-03-14
  The court affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment, finding the claims barred by the statute of limitations.
• Weston v. Bachman
  682 F.2d 202· 8th Cir.· 1982-07-07
  The court held that the district court must determine whether Arkansas's saving statutes or equitable tolling principles apply to the plaintiff's initial filing of a complaint and motion to proceed in forma pauperis.
• Cap. City Excavating Co., Inc. v. Donovan
  679 F.2d 105· 6th Cir.· 1982-05-26
  The court held that receipt of a citation by an employee authorized to accept certified mail at corporate headquarters constitutes 'receipt' for the purpose of starting the 15-day contest period, even if the employee is not authorized to act on the citation.
• Metro. Dade Cnty. v. One (1) Bronze Cannon
  537 F. Supp. 923· S.D. Fla.· 1982-04-23
  The court held that it has subject matter jurisdiction over the salvage claim, that the action is a valid admiralty claim and not a disguised interpleader, and that the statute of limitations is tolled or waived. The motion to dismiss is denied.
• Hunt v. Broce Constr., Inc.
  674 F.2d 834· 10th Cir.· 1982-04-09
  The court held that the plaintiff's amended complaint naming the correct defendant relates back to the original filing date, allowing the action to proceed despite the statute of limitations.
• Phillips v. S. Bell Tel. & Tel. Co.
  650 F.2d 655· 5th Cir.· 1981-07-13
  The court held that a discriminatory act not made the basis of a timely charge is legally equivalent to an act occurring before the statute was passed and has no present legal consequences.
• Mueller v. City OF LOS Angeles Fire Dep't
  637 F.2d 616· 9th Cir.· 1980-08-22
  The court held that the plaintiff's Title VII action was properly dismissed because his charge was not timely filed with the EEOC within the statutory period.
• In & for New Castle Cnty. Gibralt Cap. Corp.
  Del. Ch.·
  The Court denied the defendants' motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction over MFC, finding that the plaintiff had established jurisdiction under the conspiracy theory. The Court also denied the motion to dismiss the disclosure claims, the claim for appointment of a re