-
328 F. Supp. 2d 1287·
M.D. Fla.·
2004-07-30
A minor in state foster care was abused by his adoptive mother after the Department of Children and Families placed and facilitated his adoption despite evidence of risk. The court held that the plaintiff's section 1983 claims were timely under federal accrual principles and that
-
92 F. Supp. 2d 1290·
M.D. Fla.·
2000-03-15
The court held that the plaintiff's medical malpractice claim was not time-barred because she did not know the doctor-related cause of her son's injury until after the statute of limitations period had begun to run.
-
739 So. 2d 144·
Fla. 3d DCA·
1999-07-21
Multi-Line Claims Service appealed a summary judgment dismissing its breach of oral contract claim against Cumis Insurance Society on statute of limitations grounds. The Third District Court of Appeal reversed, finding that Multi-Line adequately pleaded a breach of oral contract
-
732 So. 2d 507·
Fla. 4th DCA·
1999-06-02
Margolis sued Andromides for breach of implied warranty of authority after Andromides purported to authorize a lease extension on behalf of principals who later repudiated that authority. The court affirmed summary judgment, holding that the statute of limitations began running w
-
724 So. 2d 1192·
Fla. 5th DCA·
1998-03-20
A convicted defendant whose privately retained counsel agrees to file a timely Rule 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief but negligently fails to do so within the two-year limitation period has a due process right to either a belated hearing on the motion's merits or habeas co
-
673 So. 2d 968·
Fla. 5th DCA·
1996-05-24
The Steinmetzes appealed a jury verdict awarding damages to the Johnsons for misrepresentation regarding undisclosed liabilities in a sod company sale. The appellate court reversed, finding the Johnsons' claim barred by the four-year statute of limitations and that the trial cour
-
626 So. 2d 327·
Fla. 1st DCA·
1993-11-17
The Stokes sued neighboring property owners for negligent removal of lateral soil support that allegedly caused their beach house to collapse. The trial court granted summary judgment based on the statute of limitations, finding the cause of action accrued when the Stokes receive
-
997 F.2d 1239·
8th Cir.·
1993-07-09
The court held that the six-month statute of limitations for a hybrid § 301/fair representation suit begins to run when the union's failure to pursue the grievance or arbitration becomes final, not when the employee receives actual notice.
-
994 F.2d 674·
9th Cir.·
1993-05-28
The statute of limitations for an action to compel arbitration under § 301 of the LMRA accrues only when the employer communicates an unequivocal, express rejection of the union's request for arbitration; constructive notice is insufficient.
-
991 F.2d 20·
1st Cir.·
1993-04-22
The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment, as material issues of fact remain regarding when the plaintiff should have discovered the defects in the wastewater treatment system, thus potentially tolling the statute of limitations.
-
992 F.2d 594·
6th Cir.·
1993-04-20
The court held that the plaintiff's claims were barred by the statute of limitations because the funds, possessing the means to detect discrepancies in employer reports, failed to exercise due diligence in investigating potential underpayments.
-
984 F.2d 489·
D.C. Cir.·
1993-02-09
The court held that a cause of action under the Death on the High Seas Act accrues at the time of probable death, not upon a judicial declaration of death or appointment of a representative for the defendant's decedent, and equitable tolling does not grant an automatic extension
-
960 F.2d 1265·
4th Cir.·
1992-04-03
The court held that the appellants' fraud claim against Exxon was barred by the statute of limitations because they knew or should have known of their injury and the injurer when Exxon began building a competing service station.
-
951 F.2d 38·
5th Cir.·
1991-10-08
The court held that the appellant's claim under the Federal Employers' Liability Act was time-barred because he knew or should have known his hearing disorder was work-related more than three years before filing suit.
-
934 F.2d 740·
6th Cir.·
1991-06-11
The court held that it lacked jurisdiction over 90 unnamed plaintiffs and that ERISA is not the exclusive remedy, affirming the district court's determination of the accrual date for the § 301 cause of action.
-
929 F.2d 871·
1st Cir.·
1991-04-08
The statute of limitations for an Equal Credit Opportunity Act claim accrues from the date of the discriminatory occurrence, not from the date the aggrieved party receives notification of the act.
-
926 F.2d 717·
8th Cir.·
1991-02-21
The court held that a fraud claim accrues upon discovery of the fraud, not when the last item of damage is ascertainable, and that damages are measured at the time of the transaction.
-
923 F.2d 18·
2d Cir.·
1991-01-11
The court affirmed the setting aside of conveyances as fraudulent but remanded for specific findings on whether the transferees had actual intent to defraud, which is required for awarding attorney fees under § 276-a.
-
844 F.2d 525·
8th Cir.·
1988-04-12
The court held that the commodities trading account was a mutual open account, thus the statute of limitations did not bar the claim, and the customer agreement signed individually made the appellant personally liable for the debit.
-
805 F.2d 319·
8th Cir.·
1986-11-13
The court held that a buyer must present evidence of an explicit agreement for a defined future performance period to trigger the discovery exception to the statute of limitations for breach of warranty.
-
801 F.2d 368·
10th Cir.·
1986-09-18
The court held that the prior Utah Supreme Court ruling tolling statutes of limitations for minors applied to this medical malpractice claim, and the saving clause of the amended statute allowed the claim to be filed within four years of the amendment's effective date.
-
796 F.2d 294·
9th Cir.·
1986-08-06
The court held that summary judgment dismissing the wrongful death and survival actions as time-barred was inappropriate because genuine issues of material fact exist regarding when the plaintiff discovered or should have discovered all essential elements of her product liability
-
792 F.2d 570·
6th Cir.·
1986-06-05
A claim for a continuing improper practice causing separate and recurring injuries accrues anew with each violation, but only acts within six months of suit are actionable.
-
451 So. 2d 538·
Fla. 2d DCA·
1984-06-15
Florida appellate court reversed dismissals of replevin actions for promissory notes, holding that the trial court erred in applying the statute of limitations without evidence establishing when the defendants' possession became wrongful.
-
719 F.2d 252·
7th Cir.·
1983-10-11
The court held that the plaintiffs' claim under Wis.Stat. § 135.04 was barred by the one-year statute of limitations because the cause of action accrued when the defective termination notice was issued and damages were incurred, not upon the actual termination date.
-
631 F.2d 1189·
5th Cir.·
1980-12-03
The court denied the application for rehearing, finding that the newly cited case did not alter the analysis of when the statute of limitations accrues.