Tolling Of Statute Of Limitations

2,208 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 1,245 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Clark v. Resistoflex Co.
  854 F.2d 762· 5th Cir.· 1988-09-14 ·cited 27×·via Equitable Tolling
  The court held that a fact issue exists regarding when the ADEA claim accrued and whether equitable estoppel applies to the limitations defense, but affirmed the dismissal of the ERISA claim as factually insufficient.
• Hill v. Texaco, Inc.
  825 F.2d 333· 11th Cir.· 1987-08-24 ·cited 27×·via Equitable Tolling
  Equitable tolling principles should generally apply to 15 U.S.C.A. § 2805(a) because Congress did not specifically exempt it.
• Gonzales v. Sec'y OF the AIR Force & the Dep't of the Air Force
  824 F.2d 392· 5th Cir.· 1987-08-18 ·cited 27×·via Equitable Tolling
  The court held that an amended complaint adding the proper party defendant does not relate back to the original filing date if the proper party did not receive notice of the action within the statutory limitations period.
• A.W. Hemmings v. Barian
  822 F.2d 688· 7th Cir.· 1987-06-12 ·cited 27×·via Equitable Tolling
  The court held that the six-year statute of limitations for Wisconsin's RICO statute applies to federal RICO claims, and that the district court prematurely dismissed the fraud claim for lack of diversity jurisdiction.
• Hester v. Int'l Union OF Operating Eng'rs
  818 F.2d 1537· 11th Cir.· 1987-06-12 ·cited 27×
  The court held that a union member's claim under LMRDA's bill of rights accrues when the member receives notice of the union's violation, not upon exhaustion of internal union remedies.
• Davis v. United Automobile
  765 F.2d 1510· 11th Cir.· 1985-07-22 ·cited 27×
  The court held that suits brought under section 102 of the LMRDA alleging violations of section 101(a)(2) are subject to the six-month statute of limitations borrowed from section 10(b) of the NLRA.
• Airweld, Inc. v. Airco, Inc.
  742 F.2d 1184· 9th Cir.· 1984-09-17 ·cited 27×
  The court affirmed the district court's grant of judgment notwithstanding the verdict, finding insufficient evidence to support the jury's findings on tying arrangements, price discrimination, and attempt to monopolize.
• Borzeka v. Heckler
  739 F.2d 444· 9th Cir.· 1984-08-02 ·cited 27×·via Equitable Tolling
  Failure to comply with the technical requirements of Rule 4(d)(5) for service on the United States does not automatically require dismissal if actual notice was received, there was no prejudice, there was a justifiable excuse for the defect, and dismissal would severely prejudice
• United States v. Catino
  735 F.2d 718· 2d Cir.· 1984-05-24 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the statute of limitations for bail jumping was tolled by the defendant's resistance to extradition, and that venue for the passport violation was proper in the Southern District.
• Meyer v. Riegel Prods. Corp. & James River Corp. of Va.
  720 F.2d 303· 3d Cir.· 1983-11-02 ·cited 27×·via Equitable Tolling
  The court held that a plaintiff's suspicion of discrimination or consultation with an attorney does not, as a matter of law, preclude equitable tolling of the ADEA's statute of limitations when the employer's misrepresentations may have caused the delay in filing.
• City OF Brooksville v. Hernando Cnty.
  424 So. 2d 846· Fla. 5th DCA· 1982-12-01 ·cited 27×
  The City of Brooksville appealed a partial summary judgment on liability in a breach of lease case, challenging both the trial court's finding that a statute of limitations was tolled by settlement negotiations and its consideration of untranscribed trial testimony in ruling on s
• Coke v. Gen. Adjustment Bureau, Inc.
  616 F.2d 785· 5th Cir.· 1980-05-07 ·cited 27×·via Equitable Tolling
  The court held that timely notice is a jurisdictional prerequisite for an ADEA claim, and equitable considerations are irrelevant.
• Glenann Wilkerson v. Siegfried Ins. Agency, Inc.
  621 F.2d 1042· 10th Cir.· 1980-04-14 ·cited 27×·via Equitable Tolling
  The court held that the issue of equitable tolling for statutory notice periods in discrimination claims cannot be resolved by summary judgment based solely on affidavits, requiring an evidentiary hearing. However, summary judgment for parent companies was proper as no agency rel
• K/F Dev. & Inv. Corp. v. Williamson Crane & Dozer Corp.
  367 So. 2d 1078· Fla. 3d DCA· 1979-02-13 ·cited 27×
  K/F Development sold two warehouses to Williamson Crane & Dozer Corporation with an alleged oral warranty of a ten-year roof. After the roof leaked, the buyer sued for breach of express warranty, implied warranty, and negligence. The appellate court reversed the judgment, holding
• Bell v. Aerodex, Inc.
  473 F.2d 869· 5th Cir.· 1973-02-12 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the veterans' suits for back wages were time-barred under Florida's one-year statute of limitations for wage recovery actions.
• Walter Frank Knowles alias John Frank Smith v. Carson
  419 F.2d 369· 5th Cir.· 1969-11-07 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the appellant's civil rights action was barred by the applicable statute of limitations.
• Aerojet-General Shipyards v. O'Keeffe
  413 F.2d 793· 5th Cir.· 1969-06-23 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the one-year limitations period for filing a claim for occupational disease under the Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act begins to run when the employee knows or reasonably should know that the condition is a disease arising out of employment,
• Barry Escott and others v. Barchris Constr. Corp.
  340 F.2d 731· 2d Cir.· 1965-01-18 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the statute of limitations for initiating a claim under 15 U.S.C. § 77m is tolled for potential intervenors in a spurious class action until the action is commenced.
• Kohler v. Jacobs
  138 F.2d 440· 5th Cir.· 1943-11-05 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the complaint sufficiently alleged fraud and deceit, and that the case should not have been dismissed on the pleadings, especially regarding the corporation's liability and the statute of limitations.
• Baxter v. Tod Northrup, D.O.
  128 So. 3d 908· Fla. 5th DCA· 2013-12-20 ·cited 26×
  In this medical malpractice case, the Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed summary judgment granted on statute of limitations grounds, holding that a fact question exists regarding when the plaintiff discovered or should have discovered the possibility of medical negli
• United States v. Italiano
  894 F.2d 1280· 11th Cir.· 1990-02-20 ·cited 26×
  A new indictment is not barred by the statute of limitations if it is returned within six months of a prior indictment's dismissal and alleges approximately the same facts as the original indictment, even if the legal theory of the offense has changed.
• Rylewicz v. Beaton Servs., Ltd.
  888 F.2d 1175· 7th Cir.· 1989-11-01 ·cited 26×·via Equitable Tolling
  The court held that the Cummingses lacked standing to bring RICO and civil rights claims as the alleged injuries were to the corporation, not directly to them. The court also affirmed the dismissal of the Fair Credit Reporting Act claim against certain defendants due to the statu
• Ellis D. Burrell v. Newsome
  883 F.2d 416· 5th Cir.· 1989-09-19 ·cited 26×·via Equitable Tolling
  The court held that the plaintiff's appeal was timely filed and that some of his claims were not barred by the statute of limitations due to Texas' prisoner tolling provisions.
• Lulu R. Williams v. Army & AIR Force Exch. Serv.
  830 F.2d 27· 3d Cir.· 1987-10-02 ·cited 26×·via Equitable Tolling
  A plaintiff cannot amend a complaint to name the correct defendant after the limitations period has passed if the correct defendant did not receive notice within that period, and equitable tolling is unavailable without active misleading by the defendant.
• United States v. Robertson
  810 F.2d 254· D.C. Cir.· 1987-01-27 ·cited 26×·via Tolling Provisions
  The court held that a District of Columbia arrest does not trigger the Speedy Trial Act's 30-day indictment limit, and that delays related to transportation and overdue pretrial motion responses are excludable under the Act's tolling provisions.
• Hennegan v. Pacifico Creative Serv.
  787 F.2d 1299· 9th Cir.· 1986-04-17 ·cited 26×
  The court held that overt acts in furtherance of an antitrust conspiracy within the limitations period give rise to new causes of action, but ignorance of the cause of action alone does not toll the statute of limitations.
• Kriegesmann v. Barry-Wehmiller Co.
  739 F.2d 357· 8th Cir.· 1984-07-19 ·cited 26×·via Equitable Tolling
  The court held that the employer's actions in providing severance benefits and job search assistance did not equitably toll the statute of limitations for filing an EEOC charge.
• Williams v. The United States Fed. Aviation Admin.
  711 F.2d 893· 9th Cir.· 1983-07-27 ·cited 26×·via Equitable Tolling
  The court held that the plaintiff's claim was properly dismissed because she sued the FAA agency instead of the United States, and the amendment to name the United States could not relate back due to lack of timely notice.
• Renfroe v. ELI Lilly & Co.
  686 F.2d 642· 8th Cir.· 1982-08-23 ·cited 26×
  The court held that a cause of action originates where the damage is sustained and capable of ascertainment, and accrues when the plaintiff knew or should have known the cause of the injury.
• McPARTLIN v. Comm'r OF the Internal Revenue Serv.
  653 F.2d 1185· 7th Cir.· 1981-07-17 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the Commissioner's mailing of a notice of deficiency to the taxpayer's old address was not sufficient when the Commissioner had received notice of the taxpayer's new address through various means, and therefore the Tax Court's dismissal for untimeliness was cl
• Wood v. Combustion Eng'g, Inc.
  643 F.2d 339· 5th Cir.· 1981-04-24 ·cited 26×·via Class Action Tolling
  The court held that the two-year statute of limitations for Texas general fraud applies to federal securities claims, and equitable tolling does not save the claim due to the plaintiffs' delay after opting out of a class action. However, the dismissal of the Texas Blue Sky law cl
• Williams v. Borden, Inc.
  637 F.2d 731· 10th Cir.· 1980-11-28 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the summary judgment for defendants was improper because genuine factual issues existed regarding when the plaintiff knew or should have known that her condition was caused by the defendants' product, thus precluding a determination of the statute of limitatio
• Coy L. Nolen v. Sylvan H. Sarasohn
  379 So. 2d 161· Fla. 3d DCA· 1980-01-22 ·cited 26×
  Coy Nolen appeals a summary judgment dismissing his medical malpractice action against Dr. Sarasohn for misreading a 1968 spinal x-ray as time-barred. The court reverses, holding that disputed factual questions exist regarding when Nolen discovered or should have discovered the m
• Swietlowich v. Cnty. OF Bucks & Twp. of Bristol & Harry Merker & Sgt. Stanley Martin & Sgt. Walter Hughes & Patrolman H. J. McDonough
  610 F.2d 1157· 3d Cir.· 1979-12-05 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the jury instructions on the statute of limitations were inadequate because they focused on the alteration of police logs rather than the misleading statements made to the plaintiff, requiring a new trial.
• Eldon A. C. Zeidler v. The United States & the Veterans Admin.
  601 F.2d 527· 10th Cir.· 1979-06-13 ·cited 26×
  The dissent argues that mental or legal disability should not toll the statute of limitations under the Federal Tort Claims Act, regardless of whether the tort caused the disability or the disability existed prior to the tort.
• Luis Aldana, M.D. v. Holub
  354 So. 2d 1272· Fla. 1st DCA· 1978-02-15 ·cited 26×
  The referee had no authority to extend the medical mediation hearing beyond the statutory 10-month period, even after a mistrial.
• O'Neal v. Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe
  482 F.2d 1140· 8th Cir.· 1973-07-24 ·cited 26×
  The court held that tribal remedies must generally be exhausted before bringing suit in federal court under the Indian Bill of Rights, but modified the dismissal to allow plaintiffs to pursue tribal remedies if the statute of limitations has not run.
• Standard Indus., Inc. v. Mobil OIL Corp.
  475 F.2d 220· 10th Cir.· 1973-03-14 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the trial court did not commit reversible error in its rulings on jury instructions, evidence admission, witness misconduct, or sufficiency of evidence, affirming the jury's verdict and judgments.
• White v. Padgett
  475 F.2d 79· 5th Cir.· 1973-03-02 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 was barred by the statute of limitations, and therefore did not reach the issue of defendants' immunity.
• Whitney v. Whitney
  241 So. 2d 436· Fla. 2d DCA· 1970-12-04 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the trial court erred in dismissing the suit for want of prosecution because the parties' actions, including correspondence between counsel to obtain evidence, constituted prosecution sufficient to toll the one-year period.
• Barrow Dev. Co., Inc. v. The Fulton Ins. Co.
  418 F.2d 316· 9th Cir.· 1969-11-04 ·cited 26×
  The court held that a removal petition must contain a short and plain statement of facts establishing federal jurisdiction, and a complete absence of such allegations cannot be cured by amendment after the removal period has expired.
• Gossett v. Hanlon
  195 So. 2d 865· Fla. 4th DCA· 1967-02-13 ·cited 26×
  Tommy Gossett sought a writ of mandamus to compel dismissal of his murder charge, arguing he was denied his constitutional and statutory right to a speedy trial after being held to answer for three successive court terms without trial or indictment. The court held that Florida St
• Falsetti v. Local Union NO. 2026
  355 F.2d 658· 3d Cir.· 1966-01-28 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the appellant's claims were barred by the statute of limitations, regardless of whether a state or federal period was applied.
• Rutkin v. Reinfeld
  229 F.2d 248· 2d Cir.· 1956-01-25 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claims were barred by the applicable statutes of limitations and were also unenforceable due to the illegality of the underlying transactions.
• Sun Theatre Corp. v. Rko Radio Pictures, Inc.
  213 F.2d 284· 7th Cir.· 1954-04-06 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claim for single damages was not a valid remedy under the Clayton Act, and that the statute of limitations was not tolled for defendants not named in the government's antitrust suit or for defendants who entered consent decrees.
• Bernstein v. N. V. Nederlandsche-Amerikaansche Stoomvaart - Maatschappij (Chemical Bank & Tr. Co.
  173 F.2d 71· 2d Cir.· 1949-02-21 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the New York statute of limitations was tolled by a wartime amendment, and that a license from the Treasury Department was required for a receiver to assert claims on behalf of a blocked German corporation.
• In re Bethesda Mem'l Hosp., Inc.
  123 F.3d 1407· 11th Cir.· 1997-09-26 ·cited 25×·via Equitable Tolling
  Bethesda Memorial Hospital petitioned for review of a district court's sua sponte remand order entered 34 days after removal based on defendants' failure to join the removal petition. The Eleventh Circuit held that district courts lack statutory authority under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c
• S.A.P. v. State
  704 So. 2d 583· Fla. 1st DCA· 1997-09-03 ·cited 25×
  S.A.P., a former foster child, appealed the dismissal of her negligence action against the Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services based on the statute of limitations. The court reversed, holding that the complaint's allegations of fraudulent concealment and lack
• Shendock v. Dir., Off. OF Workers' Comp. Programs. Appeal of Stephen Shendock
  893 F.2d 1458· 3d Cir.· 1990-01-12 ·cited 25×·via Equitable Tolling
  The sixty-day filing requirement for petitions for review of Benefits Review Board decisions under 33 U.S.C.A. § 921(c) is jurisdictional and cannot be equitably tolled.
• Bornholdt v. Brady
  869 F.2d 57· 2d Cir.· 1989-02-16 ·cited 25×·via Equitable Tolling
  The court held that the reprisal claim was properly dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, but the age discrimination claim was timely because the present suit relates back to an earlier timely filed lawsuit.