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

• Yazzie v. Olney
  593 F.2d 100· 9th Cir.· 1979-03-05 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment on the tort claims for two appellants because there was a genuine issue of material fact regarding when they discovered the alleged malpractice, which tolls the statute of limitations. The court affirmed su
• Cottrell v. Newspaper Agency Corp.
  590 F.2d 836· 10th Cir.· 1979-01-08 ·cited 24×·via Equitable Tolling
  The court held that the plaintiff's failure to file suit within ninety days of receiving the EEOC's Notice of Right to Sue barred his claim, as neither the EEOC's reliance on state agency findings nor the pendency of state proceedings justified equitable tolling.
• T. R. v. State
  364 So. 2d 100· Fla. 1st DCA· 1978-11-15 ·cited 24×
  The appellate court affirmed the adjudication of delinquency, holding that the second petition did not place the appellant in double jeopardy and that the 30-day filing requirement was not violated.
• State OF Ohio v. Peterson
  585 F.2d 454· 10th Cir.· 1978-10-18 ·cited 24×·via Equitable Tolling
  The court held that the trial court erred by treating a motion to dismiss as a motion for summary judgment without providing the plaintiff with notice and an opportunity to present evidence.
• Morales v. Vega
  579 F.2d 677· 1st Cir.· 1978-07-06 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment for the grievance committee members and that the case should be remanded to consider the applicability of the Puerto Rican tolling statute for the claims against the supervisory defendants.
• Meyer v. Frank
  550 F.2d 726· 2d Cir.· 1977-01-12 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the three-year New York statute of limitations for civil rights actions should not be tolled during the period the plaintiff pursued a remedy in state courts.
• Kissinger v. Foti
  544 F.2d 1257· 5th Cir.· 1977-01-10 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claims were barred by the applicable statute of limitations, and his arguments for tolling were insufficient.
• SUN Enters., Ltd. v. Train
  532 F.2d 280· 2d Cir.· 1976-03-12 ·cited 24×·via Equitable Tolling
  The court held that challenges to the Administrator's action in issuing an NPDES permit are exclusively reviewable in the court of appeals under § 509(b)(1) of the Water Act, and that such petitions are subject to a 90-day statute of limitations.
• Ruidoso Racing Ass'n, Inc. v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  476 F.2d 502· 10th Cir.· 1973-04-04 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the fraudulent acts of a corporate officer, Eugene V. Hensley, could be imputed to the corporation because they were substantially for the corporation's tax benefit, thus tolling the statute of limitations and justifying fraud penalties.
• Cooper v. United States
  442 F.2d 908· 7th Cir.· 1971-05-20 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the plaintiff's second complaint was properly dismissed because the cause of action accrued at the time of the initial injury and failure to provide care, not upon later aggravation or release, rendering the claim time-barred under the Federal Tort Claims Act.
• Richardson v. State of Fla. ex rel. Richard Douglas Milton
  219 So. 2d 77· Fla. 3d DCA· 1969-02-18 ·cited 24×
  A Florida appellate court reversed a circuit court's habeas corpus decision that retroactively applied In re Gault's right-to-counsel protections to a juvenile's original delinquency hearing and probation revocation. The court held that Gault does not apply retroactively to eithe
• Groninger v. Merrill E. Davison
  364 F.2d 638· 8th Cir.· 1966-08-26 ·cited 24×
  A federal court in a diversity action must apply state law to determine when an action is commenced for the purpose of tolling the statute of limitations, even if the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide a different method for commencement.
• Shobe v. The People OF the State OF Cal.
  362 F.2d 545· 9th Cir.· 1966-05-24 ·cited 24×
• Walsonavich v. United States
  335 F.2d 96· 3d Cir.· 1964-06-24 ·cited 24×
  The court held that an agreement extending the period for assessing excise taxes, even under the 1939 Code, tolled the statute of limitations for filing a refund claim, and the doctrine of equitable estoppel also applied against the government.
• NEW Jersey Wood Finishing Co. v. Minn. Mining & Mfg. Co.
  332 F.2d 346· 3d Cir.· 1964-05-20 ·cited 24×
  The court held that an FTC proceeding to enforce Section 7 of the Clayton Act tolls the statute of limitations for private treble damage actions under Section 4, even if the FTC proceeding concluded by consent order.
• United States v. Tyrrell
  329 F.2d 341· 7th Cir.· 1964-03-18 ·cited 24×·via Suspension Of Statute Of Limitations
  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.
• Ashe v. United States
  288 F.2d 725· 6th Cir.· 1961-04-10 ·cited 24×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict and that the trial court did not err in its jury instructions or in denying the motion for a new trial.
• Ricciuti v. Voltarc Tubes, Inc.
  277 F.2d 809· 2d Cir.· 1960-04-01 ·cited 24×
  The statute of limitations for a latent disease begins to run when the disease is diagnosed, not when the exposure or act causing it occurred, unless the plaintiff could have reasonably discovered the injury earlier.
• Rich v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  250 F.2d 170· 5th Cir.· 1957-12-12 ·cited 24×
  The Tax Court properly dismissed the taxpayer's petition for redetermination of deficiencies because it was not timely filed, as the ninety-day filing period is jurisdictional and not tolled by the taxpayer's imprisonment or government negligence.
• White v. United States
  216 F.2d 1· 5th Cir.· 1954-09-03 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the exclusion of a letter containing the defendant's instructions for filing a tax return was reversible error, and that the district court could take judicial notice of proceedings before a commissioner if properly transmitted.
• Damiano v. Pa. R. Co.
  161 F.2d 534· 3d Cir.· 1947-04-30 ·cited 24×
  The court held that compensation agreements under state law do not toll the statute of limitations for Federal Employers' Liability Act claims, as they do not constitute proceedings within the meaning of the Act and do not provide notice of the FELA claim.
• Reynolds v. Needle
  132 F.2d 161· D.C. Cir.· 1942-12-14 ·cited 24×
  The court held that summary judgment for the appellees was proper because the appellant failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact regarding the statute of limitations.
• Ford v. State
  402 So. 3d 973· Fla.· 2025-02-07 ·cited 23×·via Equitable Tolling
  James D. Ford, sentenced to death for brutal 1997 murders of a couple and sexual assault of the wife, appeals the summary denial of his third successive postconviction motion filed shortly before his scheduled execution. The Florida Supreme Court affirms the denial, rejecting For
• Okaloosa Cnty. v. Custer
  697 So. 2d 1297· Fla. 1st DCA· 1997-08-19 ·cited 23×
  Okaloosa County petitioned for certiorari after the denial of its motion to dismiss a medical malpractice complaint, arguing the respondent failed to comply with presuit requirements by not timely providing a corroborating medical expert opinion.
• State v. Carey D. Miller
  581 So. 2d 641· Fla. 2d DCA· 1991-06-14 ·cited 23×
  Florida appealed a trial court's dismissal of drug charges against Carey Miller based on the statute of limitations. The court affirmed, holding that although the state filed an information within three years of the alleged crimes, a prosecution is not commenced until a capias is
• United States v. Phillips
  843 F.2d 438· 11th Cir.· 1988-04-26 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the documents obtained via grand jury subpoena were not 'matters occurring before the grand jury' and thus not subject to Rule 6(e) secrecy. It also held that the statute of limitations for the 1979 tax return had expired because the taxpayer did not validly o
• Smith v. City OF Chicago
  769 F.2d 408· 7th Cir.· 1985-07-29 ·cited 23×
  The court held that contempt proceedings under the Shakman decree are subject to a 180-day statute of limitations, adopting the period from Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
• Dozier v. Trans World Airlines, Inc.
  760 F.2d 849· 7th Cir.· 1985-05-01 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the six-month statute of limitations under § 10(b) of the LMRA applies to hybrid suits brought under the RLA, and the limitations period began to run when the union unequivocally denied the grievance.
• Pike v. City OF Mission
  731 F.2d 655· 10th Cir.· 1984-03-30 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claims were barred by the statute of limitations and that the district court did not err in denying attorney's fees to the defendants.
• United States v. Friedman
  649 F.2d 199· 3d Cir.· 1981-05-21 ·cited 23×
  The court held that a superseding indictment is not barred by the statute of limitations if it does not expand the charges of a timely original indictment that remains pending. The court also found the evidence sufficient to support convictions for transporting stolen checks and
• In re Fine Paper Litig. State OF Wash.
  632 F.2d 1081· 3d Cir.· 1980-10-02 ·cited 23×
  The court held that New York had standing to object to the settlement's impact on the national class status and that Washington's partial assignments were valid and could be addressed through joinder or interpleader.
• Conerly v. Westinghouse Elec. Corp.
  623 F.2d 117· 9th Cir.· 1980-07-14 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to plead sufficient facts to establish fraudulent concealment, and therefore the statute of limitations was not tolled, barring his claim.
• Harold H. Gordon and the Estate of Louis P. Begin v. City OF Warren
  579 F.2d 386· 6th Cir.· 1978-06-26 ·cited 23×
  A direct cause of action exists against municipalities to recover damages for a taking of private property for public use without just compensation, and the statute of limitations does not begin to run until the controversy over the taking is resolved.
• United States v. Wazney
  529 F.2d 1287· 9th Cir.· 1976-02-02 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the statute of limitations was tolled because the defendant fled from justice, as evidenced by his intent to avoid arrest or prosecution through concealment.
• Nardone v. Reynolds
  508 F.2d 660· 5th Cir.· 1975-02-24 ·cited 23×
  The court certified questions to the Florida Supreme Court regarding the application of the "discovery rule" to the statute of limitations in medical malpractice cases, specifically concerning when a plaintiff has notice of the "injury" or "invasion of legal rights."
• Celestino Mendiola, Jr. v. United States
  401 F.2d 695· 5th Cir.· 1968-10-11 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the accrual of a tort claim against the United States under 28 U.S.C. § 2401(b) is governed by federal law, not state law, and begins when the injury and damage are discernible.
• Matthews v. Olive M. Matthews & Soft Water Laundry, Inc.
  177 So. 2d 497· Fla. 2d DCA· 1965-07-09 ·cited 23×
  An estate administrator sued to recover shares of corporate stock allegedly fraudulently transferred by a controlling shareholder after the decedent's death. The trial court dismissed after finding insufficient evidence of fraud and that the claim was barred by laches. The appell
• States Marine Corp. OF Del. v. United States
  283 F.2d 776· 2d Cir.· 1960-11-22 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the libelant's suit was time-barred under the Suits in Admiralty Act because it was filed more than two years after the cause of action arose, and the Act's time-bar is a jurisdictional limit that cannot be extended by contract or tolled by administrative proc
• Schwartz v. Zaconick
  74 So. 2d 108· Fla.· 1954-08-06 ·cited 23×
  In a mortgage foreclosure action, the Florida Supreme Court held that defendants were estopped from refiling a defense regarding a contemporaneous oral agreement to avoid interest payments after losing on that issue in a prior appeal. The Court affirmed the trial court's allowanc
• Airey v. Wal-Mart/Sedgwick
  24 So. 3d 1264· Fla. 1st DCA· 2009-12-31 ·cited 22×
  In this workers' compensation appeal, the court reversed the dismissal of a timely-filed petition for benefits, holding that a properly drafted petition tolls the statute of limitations as long as it remains pending, regardless of how much time passes.
• Roberta Santini, M.D. v. Cleveland Clinic Fla.
  232 F.3d 823· 11th Cir.· 2000-11-06 ·cited 22×·via Equitable Tolling
  The Eleventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment for Cleveland Clinic Florida, holding that Santini's Title VII and ADEA claims were time-barred because she failed to file suit within 90 days of receiving the EEOC's dismissal notice, and equitable tolling did not apply where she ha
• Timmeny v. Tropical Botanicals Corp./Zurich Ins. Co.
  615 So. 2d 811· Fla. 1st DCA· 1993-03-16 ·cited 22×
  William Timmeny appeals the denial of workers' compensation benefits based on a two-year statute of limitations bar. The court reverses, holding that an employer who becomes aware of a possible work-related injury but fails to notify the employee of potential compensation benefit
• Topalian v. Ehrman
  954 F.2d 1125· 5th Cir.· 1992-03-06 ·cited 22×·via Equitable Tolling
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to set forth specific facts establishing a genuine issue for trial, and thus affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendants.
• Ziccardi v. Strother
  570 So. 2d 1319· Fla. 2d DCA· 1990-05-18 ·cited 22×
  The court held that section 772.104, Florida Statutes, a remedial statute, could be applied retroactively to civil actions based on conduct occurring before its effective date, but the five-year statute of limitations barred claims against some defendants.
• Shayan Keramati v. Schackow
  553 So. 2d 741· Fla. 5th DCA· 1989-12-14 ·cited 22×
  The Keramatis appealed a summary judgment dismissing their legal malpractice suit against their former attorneys Schackow and McGalliard. The trial court had ruled the Keramatis were equitably estopped from suing because they accepted a $200,000 settlement in their underlying med
• Maggio v. Gerard Freezer & ICE Co.
  824 F.2d 123· 1st Cir.· 1987-07-15 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the plaintiff's federal and state claims were barred by the statute of limitations because he failed to exercise reasonable diligence in discovering the alleged fraud, despite having sufficient "storm warnings" of potential wrongdoing.
• Robert E. Bondurant, M.D. v. The Honorable Nicholas P. Geeker
  499 So. 2d 909· Fla. 1st DCA· 1986-12-22 ·cited 22×
  Dr. Bondurant sought a writ of prohibition to prevent a trial judge from allowing a wrongful death action to proceed after denying his motion to dismiss based on the statute of limitations. The Florida First District Court of Appeal denied the writ, holding that prohibition is no
• Sandor Szabo and Joan Szabo v. Essex Chem. Corp.
  461 So. 2d 128· Fla. 3d DCA· 1984-11-13 ·cited 22×
  The Szabos appealed a summary judgment dismissing their chemical exposure injury complaint as time-barred. The Third District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that filing a complaint in Florida tolls the statute of limitations regardless of subsequent delay in serving the defend
• Brogan v. Mullins
  452 So. 2d 940· Fla. 5th DCA· 1984-05-24 ·cited 22×
  Mere negotiations between counsel, absent fraud or misrepresentation inducing reliance, do not toll the running of the statute of limitations for claims against an estate under Florida Statutes section 733.709.
• Randall v. Lukhard
  709 F.2d 257· 4th Cir.· 1983-06-08 ·cited 22×
  The dissenting judge would reverse the district court's ruling that Virginia's transfer of assets provision was invalid prior to the Boren-Long Amendment, and would affirm the district court's ruling on the amended plan.