Suspension Of Statute Of Limitations

24 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Union Carbide & Carbon Corp. & Vanadium Corp. of Am. v. Nisley
  300 F.2d 561· 10th Cir.· 1961-12-27 ·cited 92×
  The court held that Rule 23(a)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, governing 'spurious' class actions, does not authorize a judgment to finally determine the rights of non-appearing class members.
• Hankey v. Susan Yarian, M.D.
  755 So. 2d 93· Fla.· 2000-03-16 ·cited 49×
  The Florida Supreme Court resolved a conflict between district courts regarding the calculation of medical malpractice statutory limitations periods. The Court held that the ninety-day "tolling" period under section 766.106(4) suspends (rather than merely bars) the running of the
• Brafman v. United States
  384 F.2d 863· 5th Cir.· 1967-10-23 ·cited 25×
  A tax assessment is invalid if the assessment certificate is not signed by an assessment officer as required by Treasury Regulations, and a suit for collection based on such an assessment is barred by the statute of limitations.
• J. M. Coe de bonis non of the Estate of W. E. Coe v. Finlayson
  41 Fla. 169· Fla.· 1899-01-01 ·cited 25×
  A Florida Supreme Court decision holding that a seven-year adverse possession does not bar a foreclosure decree on mortgaged land, and that a foreclosure suit properly revived before the statute of limitations runs is not barred by the statute even if many years have passed since
• United States v. Tyrrell
  329 F.2d 341· 7th Cir.· 1964-03-18 ·cited 24×
  The court held that issues not raised in the trial court cannot be raised for the first time on appeal, affirming the lower court's decision.
• Myrick v. United States
  296 F.2d 312· 5th Cir.· 1961-12-08 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the assessment and demand for payment of additional taxes did not constitute a rejection of an outstanding offer in compromise, and the statute of limitations remained suspended until the offer was formally rejected.
• Socony Mobil Oil Co., Inc. v. United States
  287 F.2d 910· Ct. Cl.· 1961-03-01 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the cost basis for depreciation of ships, after a price adjustment under the Merchant Ship Sales Act of 1946, is the actual adjusted cost, not the statutory sales price.
• United States v. Harris Tr. & Sav. Bank
  390 F.2d 285· 7th Cir.· 1968-02-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the taxpayers' agreement to suspend the statute of limitations in an offer in compromise remained effective despite a typewritten modification reserving defenses.
• Platzer v. Biff Burger
  144 So. 2d 507· Fla.· 1962-07-25 ·cited 7×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that § 440.13(3)(b) of the Florida Statutes permits a deputy commissioner to order indefinite medical treatment for an injured worker when the claimant's need for remedial attention is shown to continue for a long and indefinite period. The court ad
• United States v. Cooper-Smith
  439 F.2d 1095· 2d Cir.· 1971-03-12 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the taxpayer's offer of compromise, which included a waiver of the statute of limitations and agreement to suspension, effectively extended the time for the government to bring suit.
• Brown v. The United States
  391 F.2d 653· Ct. Cl.· 1968-03-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the actual filing date of a tax return, not the deemed timely date under IRC § 7503, commences the statute of limitations for assessment of deficiencies.
• Maxwell v. United States
  141 F.2d 139· 7th Cir.· 1944-03-07 ·cited 4×
  The court held that administrative consideration of a veteran's claim does not revive a right to sue in federal court after it has been barred by the statute of limitations.
• Signal OIL & GAS Co. v. United States
  125 F.2d 476· 9th Cir.· 1942-01-22 ·cited 4×
  The suits for unpaid taxes were not barred by the statute of limitations because the running of the statute was suspended during tax board proceedings and assessments were made within the extended periods.
• United States v. Wilson
  304 F.2d 530· 3d Cir.· 1962-06-08 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the action to collect unpaid income taxes was timely filed because the statute of limitations was suspended until one year after the last unpaid installment, which extended beyond the filing date.
• Frieda Springer v. Aiken
  143 Fla. 256· Fla.· 1940-05-31 ·cited 3×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that Section 185 of the Probate Act does not permit plaintiffs to institute a new action against a deceased debtor's estate after the statute of limitations has run, where an original action filed before the debtor's death was allowed to lapse witho
• W. Coast Fruit Co. v. Hackney
  102 Fla. 1066· Fla.· 1931-10-01 ·cited 3×
  West Coast Fruit Company sued W.L. Hackney for breach of contract in 1925. After an erroneous directed verdict against the plaintiff was reversed on appeal in 1929, the plaintiff abandoned the original suit and filed a new one in 1929, which was barred by the statute of limitatio
• Jorge Silva-Wiscovich, D.D.S. v. The Weber Dental Mfg. Co.
  835 F.2d 409· 1st Cir.· 1987-12-22 ·cited 2×
  The filing of an action that is later voluntarily dismissed tolls the statute of limitations, allowing a new action to be filed within the remaining statutory period.
• BOS Lines, Inc. v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  354 F.2d 830· 8th Cir.· 1965-12-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the notice of transferee liability was sufficient even if not explicitly stating 'transferee of transferee,' and that the petitioner was liable for the tax deficiency at law due to assumption of liabilities.
• Razel Dvora Waldman v. United States
  229 F.2d 99· 1st Cir.· 1956-01-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that an uncommunicated intent to withdraw a claim does not constitute a withdrawal, and the statute of limitations remains suspended if the government fails to deny the claim.
• United States v. Chused
  209 F.2d 548· 8th Cir.· 1954-01-28 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a consent order dismissing a petition for review of a Tax Court decision becomes final ninety days after its entry, as per Internal Revenue Code § 1140(b)(1).
• Ins. Co. of N. Am. v. Bd. OF Educ. OF Indep. Sch. Dist. NO. 12
  196 F.2d 901· 10th Cir.· 1952-05-05 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the insurance company's conduct suspended the one-year statute of limitations, but the insured failed to file suit within a reasonable time after denial of liability.
• Sullivan v. United States
  116 F.2d 576· 6th Cir.· 1941-01-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the suit was barred by the statute of limitations because the appellant failed to file within the prescribed time after denial of his claim.
• Lansburgh v. United States
  699 F. Supp. 279· S.D. Fla.· 1988-08-26
  The court held that the IRS assessment was timely because the statute of limitations was suspended by operation of law under 26 U.S.C. § 6503(a) until 60 days after the Tax Court's decision became final, notwithstanding the taxpayer's waiver of the prohibition against assessment.