Equitable Tolling

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

• Schuler v. United States
  628 F.2d 199· D.C. Cir.· 1980-05-23 ·cited 18×
  The court correctly ruled that Schuler's claim must fail because wrongful separation claims are not cognizable under 22 U.S.C. § 1037a(l)(C).
• Lovick P. Thomas v. E. I. DuPONT de Nemours & Co., Inc.
  574 F.2d 1324· 5th Cir.· 1978-06-15 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying the plaintiff leave to amend his complaint to allege a discrete ADEA violation occurring within the 180-day notice period, which would cure the jurisdictional defect.
• Goldstandt v. Bear
  522 F.2d 1265· 7th Cir.· 1975-08-29 ·cited 18×
  The court held that plaintiffs' claims were time-barred because they failed to exercise due diligence in discovering the alleged fraud, despite having the means to do so.
• 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
• Mendez Lynch v. Mendez Lynch
  220 F. Supp. 2d 1347· M.D. Fla.· 2002-08-13 ·cited 17×
  The court found that the Petitioner established the elements of wrongful removal under the Hague Convention, and that the Respondent failed to establish any exceptions to the mandatory return of the children.
• Caldwell v. Nat'l Ass'n OF Home Builders
  771 F.2d 1051· 7th Cir.· 1985-08-27 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the plaintiff's EEOC charge was timely filed as to the failure-to-rehire claim, even if untimely for the discriminatory discharge claim, because the charge encompassed both allegations.
• Hollman v. Dep't of Health & Human Servs.
  696 F.2d 13· 2d Cir.· 1982-12-06 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the timely filing of tax returns reporting self-employment income, even if adjusted later by the IRS or Tax Court, allows for the correction of Social Security earnings records beyond the standard statute of limitations.
• TL90108 LLC v. Ford
  837 F. 2d 457· 11th Cir.· 2025-08-11 ·cited 16×
  The Eleventh Circuit held that Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 4007(c)'s deadline for objecting to debt dischargeability cannot be equitably tolled, adhering to prior panel precedent.
• Brown v. State
  899 So. 2d 1246· Fla. 4th DCA· 2005-04-20 ·cited 16×
  Eric James Brown appealed the Department of Financial Services' denial of his motion to set aside a default revocation of his insurance license. The court reversed and remanded because factual disputes raised in Brown's motion and affidavit required resolution through an administ
• Ahumada Cabrera v. Lozano
  323 F. Supp. 2d 1303· S.D. Fla.· 2004-05-18 ·cited 16×
  The court granted the petition for return of the child, finding that the child's habitual residence was Argentina and that the respondent had wrongfully retained the child, and that the child was not settled in the United States.
• Env't Res. Assocs. OF Fla., Inc. v. State
  624 So. 2d 330· Fla. 1st DCA· 1993-09-03 ·cited 16×
  Environmental Resource Associates of Florida challenged the Department of General Services' denial of an administrative hearing based on late filing of a hearing request. The court held that equitable tolling does not apply to enlarge filing deadlines in administrative cases wher
• Early v. Bankers Life & Cas. Co.
  959 F.2d 75· 7th Cir.· 1992-03-25 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the plaintiff's amended complaint, alleging he was misled by the EEOC regarding the timeliness of his charge, should have been allowed to proceed, and the case should not have been dismissed at the pleading stage.
• Banner Indus., Inc. v. Central States
  875 F.2d 1285· 7th Cir.· 1989-05-23 ·cited 16×
  A corporation that was part of a control group employer under MPPAA remains subject to arbitration requirements even after divesting control of its subsidiary, and filing a lawsuit questioning arbitrability tolls the time for initiating arbitration.
• Warren v. Dep't OF the Army
  867 F.2d 1156· 8th Cir.· 1989-02-16 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the thirty-day filing period under Title VII is subject to equitable tolling, and an amendment to correct the defendant's name relates back to the original filing date under Rule 15(c) when equity so requires.
• Stockman v. LaCROIX
  790 F.2d 584· 7th Cir.· 1986-05-07 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the plaintiff's fraud claim was untimely filed under Wisconsin's statute of limitations, as the plaintiff had sufficient knowledge to trigger the limitations period more than six years before filing suit.
• Omalley v. GTE Serv. Corp.
  758 F.2d 818· 2d Cir.· 1985-03-26 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claim was untimely filed and that there was no basis for equitable estoppel or a continuing violation theory to overcome the statute of limitations.
• Addie Johnson v. AL Tech Specialties Steel Corp.
  731 F.2d 143· 2d Cir.· 1984-03-27 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the 90-day Title VII filing period is subject to equitable tolling, but the plaintiff's unsubstantiated excuse did not warrant tolling. It also held that compensatory and punitive damages are not available under the ADEA.
• Melva A. RAY v. Nimmo
  704 F.2d 1480· 11th Cir.· 1983-05-16 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the notice of intent to sue requirement under the ADEA is subject to equitable tolling and that a federal employee's claim for denial of due process for failure to follow agency procedures is distinct from discrimination claims.
• Nilsen v. The City OF Moss Point
  674 F.2d 379· 5th Cir.· 1982-04-26 ·cited 16×
• Mafu Inada v. Sgt. Richard Sullivan
  523 F.2d 485· 7th Cir.· 1975-08-18 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the plaintiff stated a claim for relief regarding threats made to him and his potential deportation, vacating the district court's dismissal.
• In re Cary Michael Lambrix
  624 F.3d 1355· 11th Cir.· 2010-10-26 ·cited 15×
  The Eleventh Circuit denied Lambrix's application for leave to file a second or successive federal habeas corpus petition. The court found that Lambrix failed to meet the stringent requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(2)(B), which necessitates a showing that the factual predicate
• McCOOL v. Strata OIL Co.
  972 F.2d 1452· 7th Cir.· 1992-10-26 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the Illinois statute of limitations, as it existed on June 19, 1991, applies to the securities fraud claim due to Congressional action and the investors' reliance on prior precedent. The court also found no evidence of fraudulent concealment sufficient to toll
• Jarrell v. United States Postal Serv.
  753 F.2d 1088· D.C. Cir.· 1985-01-15 ·cited 15×
  The court held that summary judgment was inappropriate because the trial court failed to consider equitable tolling for the Title VII filing requirements and did not address factual issues regarding the Privacy Act claim's timeliness.
• Smith v. T.C. McCLAMMY
  740 F.2d 925· 11th Cir.· 1984-09-04 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the plaintiff's Title VII claim was not equitably tolled due to her own negligence in filing, and her § 1983 claim was barred by the statute of limitations.
• Williams v. Wash. Metro. Area Transit Auth.
  721 F.2d 1412· D.C. Cir.· 1983-11-29 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment because genuine issues of material fact exist regarding whether the District of Columbia Office of Human Rights (OHR) was an agent of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) or had apparent autho
• Woodard v. W. Union Tel. Co.
  650 F.2d 592· 5th Cir.· 1981-07-13 ·cited 15×
  Oral notice of intent to sue is insufficient under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and the plaintiff failed to present sufficient evidence to warrant equitable tolling of the notice requirement.
• Templeton v. W. Union Tel. Co.
  607 F.2d 89· 5th Cir.· 1979-11-19 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the employee's failure to file notice of intent to sue within 180 days barred his ADEA claim, as the facts did not justify equitable tolling.
• Alton Roy Daughtry v. King's Dep't Stores, Inc.
  608 F.2d 906· 1st Cir.· 1979-11-08 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the plaintiff's Title VII claim was untimely because he failed to file with the EEOC within the statutory period, and his § 1981 claim was barred by the applicable statute of limitations.
• Booth v. Carnival Corp.
  522 F.3d 1148· 11th Cir.· 2008-04-01 ·cited 14×
  A cruise passenger's estate filed a wrongful death suit in state court within the contractual limitation period, but the state court dismissed it for improper venue. The estate then filed an identical federal suit after the limitation period expired. The Eleventh Circuit held tha
• Greene v. Seminole Elec. Coop., Inc.
  701 So. 2d 646· Fla. 5th DCA· 1997-11-14 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Florida Civil Rights Act protects individuals perceived as disabled, and that the plaintiff's allegations were sufficient to state a claim for a hostile work environment.
• Bouman v. Block
  940 F.2d 1211· 9th Cir.· 1991-07-23 ·cited 14×
  The court affirmed the district court's findings on timely filing, standing, and most discrimination claims, but remanded for further findings on specific issues including policy authority, back pay, punitive damages, and attorney's fees.
• The State OF NEW York v. Louis W. Sullivan, M.D.
  906 F.2d 910· 2d Cir.· 1990-06-27 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Secretary's policy of relying exclusively on treadmill exercise tests to evaluate disability claims for ischemic heart disease, to the exclusion of other relevant medical evidence, contravened the Social Security Act's requirement for individualized assess
• Heideman v. PFL, Inc.
  904 F.2d 1262· 8th Cir.· 1990-06-05 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to present sufficient facts to support equitable tolling of the statutes of limitations for their age discrimination, ERISA, and common law claims, thus affirming the grant of summary judgment for the employer.
• Irwin v. Veterans Admin.
  874 F.2d 1092· 5th Cir.· 1989-06-13 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the thirty-day period for filing a Title VII employment discrimination complaint against the federal government begins to run upon receipt of the right-to-sue letter by the claimant's attorney, applying the constructive notice doctrine.
• Smith v. Gen. Scanning, Inc.
  876 F.2d 1315· 7th Cir.· 1989-06-08 ·cited 14×
  The court held that while the district court should have addressed equitable tolling, it properly granted summary judgment on the merits because the plaintiff failed to show the employer's stated reasons for termination were a pretext for age discrimination.
• Berklee Coll. OF Music v. Berklee Chapter OF the Mass. Fed'n OF Teachers, Local 4412, AFT, AFL-CIO
  858 F.2d 31· 1st Cir.· 1988-09-27 ·cited 14×
  An arbitrator's interpretation of a collective bargaining agreement, even if arguably erroneous, must be upheld if it draws its essence from the contract and is plausible.
• Hopland Band OF Pomo Indians v. The United States
  855 F.2d 1573· Fed. Cir.· 1988-08-30 ·cited 14×
  The Court of Appeals held that the Hopland Band's claims were barred by the 6-year statute of limitations, 28 U.S.C. § 2501, because the claims accrued no later than 1967 and the statute cannot be tolled based on the Band's organizational difficulties.
• Bullard v. Sercon Corp. & Int'l Laborers' Union Local No. 81
  846 F.2d 463· 7th Cir.· 1988-05-13 ·cited 14×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the Title VII claim against the union due to failure to exhaust administrative remedies, but modified the judgment to reflect dismissal on jurisdictional grounds rather than the merits. The court affirmed the judgment for the employer and the u
• Koucky v. Dep't OF the Navy
  820 F.2d 300· 9th Cir.· 1987-06-18 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because the appellant failed to name the proper agency head and provide timely notice.
• Valenzuela v. Kraft, Inc.
  801 F.2d 1170· 9th Cir.· 1986-10-08 ·cited 14×
  The court held that a prior state court action, even if filed in a court lacking subject matter jurisdiction, can toll the 90-day filing period for a Title VII claim if the plaintiff acted diligently and the defendant received notice.
• Gibbs v. Pierce Cnty. LAW Enf't Support Agency
  785 F.2d 1396· 9th Cir.· 1986-03-27 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' claims were timely filed, administrative remedies were exhausted, and the district court's finding of intentional wage discrimination was not clearly erroneous.
• Refrigeration Sales Co., Inc. v. Mitchell-Jackson, Inc.
  770 F.2d 98· 7th Cir.· 1985-08-09 ·cited 14×
  A warehouse receipt's limitation of claims clause, valid under the UCC, applies to conversion claims and prevents suits filed outside the specified period, even when brought against the warehouse operator's officer for negligence.
• Dawe v. OLD BEN Coal Co. & Dir.
  754 F.2d 225· 7th Cir.· 1985-02-04 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Benefits Review Board correctly dismissed the appeal as untimely filed, as there is no statutory authority for equitable tolling or enlargement of the filing deadline in black lung benefit cases.
• Nordell v. Heckler
  749 F.2d 47· D.C. Cir.· 1984-12-04 ·cited 14×
  A timely request for reconsideration of an EEOC decision renders the initial decision non-final, extending the statutory deadline for filing a Title VII suit until 30 days after the reconsideration decision.
• Camilla Norris v. Fla. Dep't OF Health & Rehabilitative Servs.
  730 F.2d 682· 11th Cir.· 1984-04-23 ·cited 14×
  The court held that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(e) does not extend the 90-day filing period for a Title VII lawsuit when the period begins upon receipt of the right-to-sue notice.
• Balseyro v. GTE Lenkurt, Inc.
  702 F.2d 857· 10th Cir.· 1983-03-21 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the ninety-day filing period for Title VII actions is subject to equitable tolling, and that a defendant may be sued even if not formally named in the EEOC charge if there is sufficient identity of interest and notice.
• Booker T. Stafford v. Muscogee Cnty. Bd. OF Educ.
  688 F.2d 1383· 11th Cir.· 1982-10-15 ·cited 14×
  The court held that Stafford's Title VII claim was time-barred due to late filing with the EEOC, but his § 1981 claims for equitable relief were not time-barred. Genuine issues of fact remained regarding his § 1981 damages claims and the merits of the Georgetown principalship cla
• JePhunneh Lawrence v. Staats
  640 F.2d 427· D.C. Cir.· 1981-02-05 ·cited 14×
  Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 applies to employees of the General Accounting Office (GAO) only if they are in the competitive service, not the excepted service.
• Larson v. Am. Wheel & Brake, Inc.
  610 F.2d 506· 8th Cir.· 1979-12-04 ·cited 14×
• Keyse v. Cal. Tex. OIL Corp. & Am. Overseas Petroleum Ltd.
  590 F.2d 45· 2d Cir.· 1978-12-21 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 and Title VII were time-barred due to failure to file timely administrative charges and lawsuits.