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

• John S. Hamilton et ux. v. Largo Paint & Decorating Inc.
  335 So. 2d 623· Fla. 2d DCA· 1976-07-28 ·cited 16×
  Hamilton appeals the trial court's denial of their motion to dismiss a mechanic's lien foreclosure action as time-barred. The court held that a prior dismissal for lack of prosecution did not toll the one-year statute of limitations for filing a lien foreclosure suit, and therefo
• Wis. River Valley Dist. Council of the United Bhd. of Carpenters & Joiners of Am., Afl-Cio v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  532 F.2d 47· 7th Cir.· 1976-03-26 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the unfair labor practice charge was time-barred by Section 10(b) of the NLRA because the underlying fine was levied more than six months prior to the charge filing, and the subsequent lawsuit to collect the fine was not an independent violation.
• Dortha Allen GUY v. Robbins & Myers, Inc.
  525 F.2d 124· 6th Cir.· 1975-10-24 ·cited 16×
  The court did not directly rule on the retroactivity of the 1972 amendment but noted the issue was not presented to the District Court.
• Dupree v. Hutchins Bros.
  521 F.2d 236· 5th Cir.· 1975-10-15 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court's findings were not clearly erroneous and that the appellant's claims were barred by the statute of limitations or unsupported by evidence.
• Mafu Inada v. Sgt. Richard Sullivan
  523 F.2d 485· 7th Cir.· 1975-08-18 ·cited 16×·via Equitable Tolling
  The court held that the plaintiff stated a claim for relief regarding threats made to him and his potential deportation, vacating the district court's dismissal.
• Torres v. Secretary OF Health
  475 F.2d 466· 1st Cir.· 1973-03-23 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the claimant's mental disability, if proven to have prevented timely pursuit of remedies, could potentially excuse him from the time limitations for reopening a prior disability claim.
• Bufalino v. The Mich. Bell Tel. Co.
  404 F.2d 1023· 6th Cir.· 1968-12-13 ·cited 16×
  The court held that claims against Michigan Bell and its employees for incidents on June 10-11, 1965, were not violations of the Communications Act, and claims predating January 20, 1964, were barred by the statute of limitations. However, claims against certain police officers f
• Burns v. Mass. Inst. OF Tech.
  394 F.2d 416· 1st Cir.· 1968-05-08 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claims were barred by the statute of limitations, as the cause of action accrued when the plaintiff discovered the alleged breaches, not upon final communication.
• Millard B. Conklin v. Boyd
  189 So. 2d 401· Fla. 1st DCA· 1966-08-11 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the statute of limitations may be tolled if the defendant doctor was out of state, and the doctor's failure to observe the patient and review test results presented a triable issue of fact regarding proximate cause.
• Crown Coat Front Co., Inc. v. United States
  363 F.2d 407· 2d Cir.· 1966-06-22 ·cited 16×
  The statute of limitations for claims under the Tucker Act should be tolled during the pendency of mandatory administrative proceedings required by a contract's disputes clause.
• Friday v. Newman
  183 So. 2d 25· Fla. 2d DCA· 1966-02-02 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the statute of limitations is tolled by a defendant's absence from the state, even after the rule changed to commence actions upon filing a complaint, provided service of process was not possible.
• United States v. Fritz M. COX
  348 F.2d 294· 6th Cir.· 1965-07-06 ·cited 16×
  The court affirmed convictions for income tax evasion for 1957 and 1958, but vacated the conviction for 1956 due to the statute of limitations.
• Kellogg-Citizens Nat'l Bank OF Green BAY v. The United States
  330 F.2d 635· Ct. Cl.· 1964-04-17 ·cited 16×
  A taxpayer must file a protective refund claim within the limitations period, even if the exact amount of a potential deduction is not yet determined, to preserve their right to a refund.
• In re Est. of David Aron
  118 So. 2d 546· Fla. 3d DCA· 1960-03-10 ·cited 16×
  The failure of an incompetent widow's guardian to file a dower election within the statutory nine-month period bars the dower right, as statutes of limitations are not tolled for disability without explicit statutory provision.
• Jens Claussen v. Mene Grande OIL Co.
  275 F.2d 108· 3d Cir.· 1960-01-26 ·cited 16×
  The court held that while the Jones Act claim was time-barred, the unseaworthiness and maintenance and cure claims might be timely if not barred by laches, and remanded for a determination of prejudice.
• Stoudenmire v. Fla. Loan Co., Inc.
  117 So. 2d 500· Fla. 1st DCA· 1960-01-26 ·cited 16×
  Stoudenmire sued Florida Loan Company for breach of an oral agreement to repurchase preferred stock within fourteen days of notice. The trial court granted summary judgment based on the three-year statute of limitations for oral contracts, holding the action was barred because th
• Sperry Rand Corp. v. Bell
  272 F.2d 29· 2d Cir.· 1959-07-21 ·cited 16×
• Wester v. Mitchell Rigdon and his wife
  110 So. 2d 470· Fla. 1st DCA· 1959-01-20 ·cited 16×
  The court held that sealed promissory notes are no longer specialties at common law and are subject to the same rules for tolling the statute of limitations as unsealed notes.
• Cont'l Cas. Co. v. The Benny Skou
  200 F.2d 246· 4th Cir.· 1952-12-03 ·cited 16×
  The absence of the vessel from the jurisdiction does not toll the one-year substantive limitation period of the Virginia Death by Wrongful Act statute when enforcing an in rem action in admiralty.
• Hickok Producing & Dev. Co. v. Tex. Co.
  128 F.2d 183· 5th Cir.· 1942-05-20 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the defendant failed to prove its defense of a sale to an affiliate and that its deceptive accounting practices tolled the statute of limitations.
• Biggs v. Mays
  125 F.2d 693· 8th Cir.· 1942-02-16 ·cited 16×
  A bankruptcy judge has the power to review a referee's order sua sponte, and correspondence attempting to settle a debt does not constitute an acknowledgment sufficient to toll the statute of limitations under Arkansas law.
• Roess v. The Malsby Co.
  69 Fla. 15· Fla.· 1915-01-15 ·cited 16×
  This case addresses whether a foreign corporation doing business in Florida, and amenable to service of process there, can plead the statute of limitations as a defense. The court held that such a corporation is entitled to the benefit of the statute of limitations.
• Bishop v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.
  96 So. 3d 464· Fla. 5th DCA· 2012-08-31 ·cited 15×
  This case involves whether a decedent who smoked tobacco products qualifies as a member of the Engle class, which would toll the statute of limitations for a wrongful death suit. The Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed summary judgment granted to tobacco defendants, holding t
• In re Cary Michael Lambrix
  624 F.3d 1355· 11th Cir.· 2010-10-26 ·cited 15×·via Equitable Tolling
  The Eleventh Circuit denied Lambrix's application for leave to file a second or successive federal habeas corpus petition. The court found that Lambrix failed to meet the stringent requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(2)(B), which necessitates a showing that the factual predicate
• Solar Pane Insulating Glass, Inc. v. Hanssen
  727 So. 2d 961· Fla. 1st DCA· 1998-11-30 ·cited 15×
  Solar Pane Insulating Glass, Inc. and its claims administrator appealed a workers' compensation order awarding medical benefits to Bradley Hanssen for a 1985 back injury, despite a nearly nine-year gap in treatment requests. The court reversed, holding that the two-year statute o
• McCOOL v. Strata OIL Co.
  972 F.2d 1452· 7th Cir.· 1992-10-26 ·cited 15×·via Equitable Tolling
  The court held that the Illinois statute of limitations, as it existed on June 19, 1991, applies to the securities fraud claim due to Congressional action and the investors' reliance on prior precedent. The court also found no evidence of fraudulent concealment sufficient to toll
• Hayes v. Otis Elevator Co.
  946 F.2d 1272· 7th Cir.· 1991-10-28 ·cited 15×
  The court held that a maintenance contract does not toll the statute of repose for products liability claims, and that the plaintiff failed to present sufficient evidence to overcome the directed verdict standard for her negligence claims.
• Westburne Supply, Inc. v. Cmty. Villas P'rs, Ltd.
  508 So. 2d 431· Fla. 1st DCA· 1987-05-19 ·cited 15×
  Westburne Supply appealed the dismissal of its claim for an equitable lien against property purchased by Community Villas. The court reversed, holding that an action to foreclose an equitable lien is a quasi in rem action against the property itself, not an in personam action, an
• Mickey Price and Hudson Price v. United States
  775 F.2d 1491· 11th Cir.· 1985-11-13 ·cited 15×
  The court should reverse summary judgment to allow a fact-finder to determine when the plaintiffs knew or should have known about the negligent reporting of a pregnancy test, which caused them to lose the opportunity of having a child.
• Jarrell v. United States Postal Serv.
  753 F.2d 1088· D.C. Cir.· 1985-01-15 ·cited 15×·via Equitable Tolling
  The court held that summary judgment was inappropriate because the trial court failed to consider equitable tolling for the Title VII filing requirements and did not address factual issues regarding the Privacy Act claim's timeliness.
• Smith v. T.C. McCLAMMY
  740 F.2d 925· 11th Cir.· 1984-09-04 ·cited 15×·via Equitable Tolling
  The court held that the plaintiff's Title VII claim was not equitably tolled due to her own negligence in filing, and her § 1983 claim was barred by the statute of limitations.
• Wells v. Rockefeller
  728 F.2d 209· 3d Cir.· 1984-02-23 ·cited 15×
  The court held that a defendant's deliberate strategy to allow a default judgment to occur in a possessory action, as a litigation tactic, precludes opening that judgment, and that most of the defendant's subsequent claims were time-barred by the statute of limitations.
• Williams v. Wash. Metro. Area Transit Auth.
  721 F.2d 1412· D.C. Cir.· 1983-11-29 ·cited 15×·via Equitable Tolling
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment because genuine issues of material fact exist regarding whether the District of Columbia Office of Human Rights (OHR) was an agent of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) or had apparent autho
• Glater v. ELI Lilly & Co.
  712 F.2d 735· 1st Cir.· 1983-07-27 ·cited 15×·via Class Action Tolling
  The court held that the defendant did not waive its right to raise the personal jurisdiction defense, and the pendency of a class action did not preclude dismissal. The court deferred final decision pending the Supreme Court's ruling in a related case.
• Greene v. Whirlpool Corp.
  708 F.2d 128· 4th Cir.· 1983-05-31 ·cited 15×
  The court held that unequivocal oral notice can satisfy the filing requirement under section 626(d) of the ADEA, based on remedial purpose, legislative history, and administrative interpretation.
• Nathan Rodgers Constr. & Realty Corp. v. City OF Saraland
  676 F.2d 162· 5th Cir.· 1982-05-17 ·cited 15×
  The court denied the petition for rehearing, finding no plain error in not reversing on an issue not clearly presented to the district court.
• Yanci Dupree v. Burtell Jefferson
  666 F.2d 606· D.C. Cir.· 1981-10-06 ·cited 15×
  Under District of Columbia law, the pendency of an action involuntarily dismissed without prejudice does not toll the running of the statute of limitations.
• Woodard v. W. Union Tel. Co.
  650 F.2d 592· 5th Cir.· 1981-07-13 ·cited 15×·via Equitable Tolling
  Oral notice of intent to sue is insufficient under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and the plaintiff failed to present sufficient evidence to warrant equitable tolling of the notice requirement.
• Templeton v. W. Union Tel. Co.
  607 F.2d 89· 5th Cir.· 1979-11-19 ·cited 15×·via Equitable Tolling
  The court held that the employee's failure to file notice of intent to sue within 180 days barred his ADEA claim, as the facts did not justify equitable tolling.
• Alton Roy Daughtry v. King's Dep't Stores, Inc.
  608 F.2d 906· 1st Cir.· 1979-11-08 ·cited 15×·via Equitable Tolling
  The court held that the plaintiff's Title VII claim was untimely because he failed to file with the EEOC within the statutory period, and his § 1981 claim was barred by the applicable statute of limitations.
• United States v. Towill
  548 F.2d 1363· 9th Cir.· 1977-02-24 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing Count I because the § 6531 complaint procedure was available and established probable cause, but affirmed the dismissal of Count II with prejudice due to the Government's failure to prosecute after being warned.
• Bedros Azaroglu v. Jordan
  270 So. 2d 422· Fla. 3d DCA· 1972-12-12 ·cited 15×
  Bedros Azaroglu appealed a judgment dismissing his claim for approximately $29,000 in back wages against his deceased employer's estate. The court held that the one-year statute of limitations for wage claims under Florida law barred the action, and filing a timely claim against
• Tallman v. Udall
  324 F.2d 411· D.C. Cir.· 1963-09-19 ·cited 15×
  A party who does not appeal an adverse ruling cannot raise that issue on appeal to support affirmance, as it constitutes a waiver.
• Allis-Chalmers Mfg. Co. v. Commonwealth Edison Co.
  315 F.2d 558· 7th Cir.· 1963-03-29 ·cited 15×
  Fraudulent concealment of a cause of action tolls the four-year statute of limitations provided in Section 4B of the Clayton Act, even in the absence of a specific tolling exception within the statute.
• Carey v. Beyer
  75 So. 2d 217· Fla.· 1954-10-22 ·cited 15×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that insanity does not toll the statute of limitations for slander of title actions absent an explicit statutory saving clause. The plaintiff's two-year limitations period had expired before he brought suit, and the disability exception in Florida's
• Van Deren v. Lory
  87 Fla. 422· Fla.· 1924-05-05 ·cited 15×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that the seven-year statute of limitations for actions on judgments from other states does not begin to run until the defendant has entered Florida and is within the court's jurisdiction, even if the defendant was never previously a resident of the
• Booth v. Carnival Corp.
  522 F.3d 1148· 11th Cir.· 2008-04-01 ·cited 14×·via Equitable Tolling
  A cruise passenger's estate filed a wrongful death suit in state court within the contractual limitation period, but the state court dismissed it for improper venue. The estate then filed an identical federal suit after the limitation period expired. The Eleventh Circuit held tha
• Pearson v. State
  867 So. 2d 517· Fla. 1st DCA· 2004-02-26 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the statute of limitations was tolled due to the defendant's absence from the state, and that counsel was not ineffective for failing to raise a double jeopardy claim based on a negotiated plea.
• Greene v. Seminole Elec. Coop., Inc.
  701 So. 2d 646· Fla. 5th DCA· 1997-11-14 ·cited 14×·via Equitable Tolling
  The court held that the Florida Civil Rights Act protects individuals perceived as disabled, and that the plaintiff's allegations were sufficient to state a claim for a hostile work environment.
• Cassoutt v. Cessna Aircraft Co.
  660 So. 2d 277· Fla. 1st DCA· 1995-04-07 ·cited 14×
  Cessna Aircraft Company's summary judgment was affirmed in a products liability action arising from a 1989 single-engine aircraft crash. The court held that the twelve-year statute of repose in effect when the aircraft was delivered in 1966 barred the action filed in 1991, and th