Equitable Tolling

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

• Brown v. Safepoint Ins. Co.
  388 So. 3d 242· Fla. 2d DCA· 2025-03-07 ·cited 8×
  Luis Brown and Mirta Moreno appealed the dismissal of their insurance complaint against Safepoint Insurance for failure to comply with the statute of limitations. The Florida Second District Court of Appeal affirmed the dismissal, rejecting arguments for equitable tolling and ret
• Nelson v. Secretary, Florida Dept. of Corrections
  610 F. Supp. 2d 1323· M.D. Fla.· 2009-03-26 ·cited 8×
  The Court held that the habeas petition was timely filed and that the petitioner's claims regarding the exclusion of evidence, use of privileged communications, and introduction of bad acts evidence were either not cognizable, unexhausted, procedurally barred, or without merit. F
• Ramirez v. McCRAVY
  4 So. 3d 692· Fla. 3d DCA· 2009-02-18 ·cited 8×
  Administrative orders issued due to hurricane-related court closures do not toll the statute of limitations for a tort action unless the plaintiff demonstrates the emergencies actually impeded their ability to file suit.
• Rosner v. United States
  231 F. Supp. 2d 1202· S.D. Fla.· 2002-11-26 ·cited 8×
  The court held that equitable tolling applies to the plaintiffs' claims, making them timely, and that the Administrative Procedure Act waives sovereign immunity for non-monetary relief regarding the international law claim, but the Fifth Amendment claim fails due to extraterritor
• Eugenio L. Rodriguez v. Holmes
  963 F.2d 799· 5th Cir.· 1992-06-24 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the statute of limitations for the pro se litigant's civil rights action was tolled during the pendency of his state court proceedings, and therefore the action was timely filed.
• Wheeldon v. Monon Corp.
  946 F.2d 533· 7th Cir.· 1991-10-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that even if equitable estoppel applied to make the filing timely, the plaintiff's underlying age discrimination claim was legally insufficient and did not raise a genuine issue of material fact.
• Marcus v. Louis V. Sullivan, M.D.
  926 F.2d 604· 7th Cir.· 1991-02-21 ·cited 8×
  The Secretary must consider a claimant's residual functional capacity (RFC) when determining if their impairments meet the Listing of Impairments for disability benefits, as a mechanical comparison of medical findings alone is insufficient and contrary to the Act's functional app
• J.D. Hamilton v. 1ST Source Bank
  928 F.2d 86· 4th Cir.· 1990-12-27 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the 180-day statute of limitations for pay discrimination claims under ADEA should be subject to a discovery rule, not applied mechanically.
• Spiller v. Ella Smithers Geriatric Ctr.
  919 F.2d 339· 5th Cir.· 1990-12-18 ·cited 8×
  The court held that summary judgment was properly granted on all claims and that sanctions under Rule 11 were appropriate, though the amount of attorney fees awarded needed recalculation due to the appellee's failure to mitigate.
• Schafer v. Bd. OF Pub. Educ. OF THE Sch. Dist. OF Pittsburgh
  903 F.2d 243· 3d Cir.· 1990-05-17 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a collective bargaining agreement provision granting childrearing leave only to female employees violates Title VII, and that the union may be sued even if not named in the initial EEOC charge if it had notice and shared interests with the named party.
• Munoz v. Aldridge
  894 F.2d 1489· 5th Cir.· 1990-02-28 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the class action for failure to exhaust administrative remedies and in dismissing individual claims as untimely or barred by res judicata, reversing the grant of summary judgment.
• Rennie v. Garrett
  896 F.2d 1057· 7th Cir.· 1990-02-26 ·cited 8×
  The administrative deadline for federal employees to bring a retaliation complaint to an EEO counselor should be construed as a statute of limitations, not a jurisdictional prerequisite.
• Walker v. ST. Anthony's Med. Ctr.
  881 F.2d 554· 8th Cir.· 1989-08-04 ·cited 8×
• Schroeder v. Copley Newspaper
  879 F.2d 266· 7th Cir.· 1989-07-12 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to file a timely charge of age discrimination with the EEOC and that no grounds existed to equitably toll the charge-filing period.
• Sherpell v. Humnoke Sch. Dist. NO. 5 OF Lonoke Cnty.
  874 F.2d 536· 8th Cir.· 1989-05-09 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court erred in refusing to allow the appellant to proceed on her retaliation claim, as the claim was sufficiently intertwined with the racial discrimination claim and the appellee had notice.
• Smith v. Kaldor
  869 F.2d 999· 6th Cir.· 1989-03-17 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a federal employee who elected to pursue a grievance under a collective bargaining agreement could not subsequently pursue a Title VII claim for the same matter, as he failed to exhaust his administrative remedies under the agreement.
• Bolden v. Bowen
  868 F.2d 916· 7th Cir.· 1989-02-09 ·cited 8×
  The court suggests that the jurisdictional question of reopening Social Security claims is not clear-cut, especially when a claim is reconsidered on the merits rather than merely refused reopening.
• LaVALLEE Northside Civic Ass'n & LaVallee Vill. Dev. Assoc., Inc. v. Virgin Islands Coastal Zone Mgmt. Comm'n
  866 F.2d 616· 3d Cir.· 1989-01-27 ·cited 8×
  The court held that plaintiffs must exhaust administrative remedies before seeking judicial relief for permit disputes, and that the statutory period for administrative appeal begins upon the final issuance of the permit, not an earlier vote or modification.
• James v. United States Postal Serv. & United States Postmaster Gen.
  835 F.2d 1265· 8th Cir.· 1988-01-04 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the appellant's failure to comply with statutory time limits and notice requirements for filing his employment discrimination suit barred his claims, even if equitable tolling were considered.
• Middleton v. DAN River, Inc.
  834 F.2d 903· 11th Cir.· 1987-12-21 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the statute of limitations was equitably tolled for two plaintiffs due to fraudulent concealment by the employer, but not for a third plaintiff. The court also affirmed the sufficiency of evidence for occupational pneumoconiosis and the appropriateness of a nu
• Arriaga-Zayas v. Int'l Ladies' Garment Workers' Union-Puerto RICO Council
  835 F.2d 11· 1st Cir.· 1987-12-10 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' hybrid § 301/fair representation claim was time-barred because it was filed more than six months after they knew or should have known of the union's alleged wrongdoing.
• Ross v. U.S. Postal Serv.
  814 F.2d 616· 11th Cir.· 1987-04-13 ·cited 8×
  The thirty-day limitation for filing a Title VII civil action by an aggrieved federal employee after adverse agency action is not jurisdictional.
• Bolling v. City & Cnty. OF Denver
  790 F.2d 67· 10th Cir.· 1986-05-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claims under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1983 were precluded by a prior state court judgment under the doctrine of res judicata, and the Title VII claim was barred by the statute of limitations.
• Dillman v. Combustion Eng'g, Inc.
  784 F.2d 57· 2d Cir.· 1986-01-28 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the appellant failed to establish a triable issue of fact regarding equitable tolling or equitable estoppel for his untimely EEOC filing.
• Antoine v. United States Postal Serv.
  781 F.2d 433· 5th Cir.· 1986-01-28 ·cited 8×
  The filing of a right-to-sue notice and a request for appointment of counsel does not commence a civil action under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 3 and 8(a) if it lacks a short and plain statement of the claim showing entitlement to relief.
• McTIGHE v. Mechanics Educ. Soc'y OF Am., Local 19, AFL-CIO
  772 F.2d 210· 6th Cir.· 1985-09-04 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a supervisor terminated from employment is not owed a duty of fair representation by the union, and an age discrimination claim was barred by the statute of limitations.
• Harper v. Wilton B. Burgess
  701 F.2d 29· 4th Cir.· 1983-02-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that notice to a plaintiff's attorney constitutes notice to the plaintiff for the purpose of the 90-day filing period for a right-to-sue letter.
• FOX v. Eaton Corp.
  689 F.2d 91· 6th Cir.· 1982-09-27 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the plaintiff's Title VII claim was properly dismissed because she failed to file a charge with the EEOC within the statutory 180-day period, and no equitable grounds existed to toll this period.
• Lanier Waiters v. Robert Bosch Corp.
  683 F.2d 89· 4th Cir.· 1982-07-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the plaintiff's affidavit, despite minor omissions, constituted a sufficient charge of discrimination under Title VII, and the filing period should be tolled due to equitable circumstances.
• Mellman v. Honorable John A. Rudd
  389 So. 2d 706· Fla. 1st DCA· 1980-10-30 ·cited 8×
  An immunity contract is not an exceptional circumstance permitting tolling of the speedy trial rule under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.191(d)(2), and the right to speedy trial cannot be waived on a silent record. The 180-day speedy trial period is strictly measured absent
• Peabody Coal Co. v. Train
  518 F.2d 940· 6th Cir.· 1975-07-10 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the petitioner's failure to file its petition for review within the statutory 90-day period deprives the court of jurisdiction.
• Mathis v. The United States
  394 F.2d 519· Ct. Cl.· 1968-06-14 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a trial should be had on the issue of whether the plaintiff, acting pro se, attempted to timely transmit a petition from jail.
• Alfreida Hogan v. Sec'y, U.S. Dep't of Veterans Affairs
  121 F.4th 172· 11th Cir.· 2024-11-01 ·cited 7×
  The Eleventh Circuit held that the 15-day deadline for federal employees to file a formal administrative complaint under Title VII is a claims-processing rule, not a jurisdictional prerequisite, and is subject to equitable tolling. However, the court affirmed dismissal because th
• Nuvasive, Inc. v. Absolute Med., LLC
  71 F.4th 861· 11th Cir.· 2023-06-21 ·cited 7×
  NuVasive sued its exclusive distributor Absolute Medical and related parties for breaching a distribution agreement and noncompetition provisions, with the contract dispute being arbitrated at the district court's direction. After the arbitration panel denied NuVasive's damages c
• Iriele v. Griffin
  65 F.4th 1280· 11th Cir.· 2023-04-17 ·cited 7×
  An executor cannot represent an estate pro se in federal court if there are additional beneficiaries or outstanding creditors, but the district court must provide an opportunity to cure this defect before dismissal.
• Hutchinson v. State
  343 So. 3d 50· Fla.· 2022-06-16 ·cited 7×
  Jeffrey Hutchinson, convicted of four murders in 1998 and sentenced to death, appealed the summary denial of his second successive postconviction motion. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the denial, finding his claims of newly discovered evidence, Brady violations, and Giglio v
• Ross v. JIM Adams Ford, Inc.
  871 So. 2d 312· Fla. 2d DCA· 2004-05-07 ·cited 7×
  John Ross sued his former employer for disability discrimination under the Florida Civil Rights Act, alleging he was terminated due to a work-related leg fracture. The trial court granted summary judgment dismissing the claim as barred by the four-year statute of limitations, whi
• O'Donnell's Corp. v. Himrod Ambroise
  858 So. 2d 1138· Fla. 5th DCA· 2003-11-07 ·cited 7×
  O'Donnell's Corporation appealed an order remanding its petition for relief from an unlawful employment practice back to an administrative law judge for further proceedings. The Fifth District Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, holding that the remand order was not a final age
• Thompson v. Orange Lake Country Club, Inc.
  224 F. Supp. 2d 1368· M.D. Fla.· 2002-07-23 ·cited 7×
  The court granted summary judgment for the defendant on Title VII claims due to failure to exhaust administrative remedies with the EEOC, and on defamation claims, but denied it on FCRA claims pending further review of administrative exhaustion.
• Jimenez v. Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co.
  974 F.2d 221· 1st Cir.· 1992-09-08 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the passenger ticket's one-year limitations period for filing suit was valid and enforceable, and that equitable tolling did not apply.
• Olson v. Mobil OIL Corp.
  904 F.2d 198· 4th Cir.· 1990-05-21 ·cited 7×
  The court held that whether a plaintiff reasonably relied on an employer's misrepresentations in neglecting to file a timely charge is a question of material fact for the jury, precluding summary judgment.
• Dougherty v. Barry
  869 F.2d 605· D.C. Cir.· 1989-03-07 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the Title VII claims were untimely because the second right-to-sue notice did not revive the lost right to sue, and that the monetary value of the promotions should be divided among the plaintiffs, not awarded individually.
• 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
• WAY v. Mueller Brass Co.
  840 F.2d 303· 5th Cir.· 1988-03-23 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the statute of limitations had not run on claims under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985, but affirmed dismissal of Title VII claims and claims against the state commission for improper service.
• The Cleveland Newspaper Guild v. The Plain Dealer Publ'g Co.
  839 F.2d 1147· 6th Cir.· 1988-02-11 ·cited 7×
• Calhoun v. Fed. Nat'l Mortg. Ass'n
  823 F.2d 451· 11th Cir.· 1987-08-03 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the Federal National Mortgage Association Charter Act and Georgia's age discrimination statute do not provide a private right of action, and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act claim was untimely filed.
• Manning v. Carlin
  786 F.2d 1108· 11th Cir.· 1986-04-15 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the thirty-day limitations period for filing an EEOC complaint under Title VII should not be tolled due to intimidation, as the circumstances did not fit recognized exceptions for equitable modification.
• Natacha Jean-Francois v. The City of N. Miami
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-12-30 ·cited 6×
  The court granted the motion for reconsideration, finding that the prior dismissal of Title VII claims may have been based on a misapprehension of the statutory authority required to issue a Notice of Right to Sue against a governmental entity.
• Johnson v. Jones
  2023 WL 4358555· M.D. Fla.· 2024-09-25 ·cited 6×
  The court denied all of the plaintiff's post-judgment motions, finding them moot or without merit.
• Franco P. Clement v. U.S. Attorney General
  75 F.4th 1193· 11th Cir.· 2023-07-28 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a petitioner can forfeit the right to judicial review of a citizenship claim by voluntarily withdrawing their appeal and requesting deportation.