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

• Eliza K. Morgan v. Schlanger
  374 F.2d 235· 4th Cir.· 1967-02-27 ·cited 6×
  The court held that under Virginia law, the statute of limitations in malpractice cases runs from the date of the wrongful act, not the date of discovery, and that expert medical testimony is required to establish a breach of the standard of care.
• Headley v. Moorman
  192 So. 2d 30· Fla. 1st DCA· 1966-11-03 ·cited 6×
  This interlocutory appeal addresses whether a tax deed issued to appellants was properly issued or void under the Soldiers' and Sailors' Civil Relief Act. The court held that the tax deed was void because it was issued prematurely while the property owner was in military service,
• Levy v. Michael J. Kirk, M.D.
  187 So. 2d 401· Fla. 3d DCA· 1966-06-07 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the defendant doctor's absence from the state could toll the statute of limitations, and that the alleged abandonment of the patient presented a triable issue of fact regarding proximate cause, precluding summary judgment.
• Diamond v. The United States
  344 F.2d 703· Ct. Cl.· 1965-04-16 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the claims for Army and Air Force disability retirement pay are barred by the statute of limitations, but the claim for active duty pay is a continuing claim and thus timely for the six years preceding the filing of the petition.
• PAN Am. Petroleum Corp. & Socony Mobil Oil Co., Inc. v. Long
  340 F.2d 211· 5th Cir.· 1964-12-30 ·cited 6×
• John Walsh in Bankruptcy for Basic Mining v. Lockhart Assocs. [Col. Warren L. Lockhart
  339 F.2d 417· 5th Cir.· 1964-11-27 ·cited 6×·via Equitable Tolling
  The court held that the appellees were holders in due course of the promissory note and that the Referee's order granting leave to file their proof of claim was proper.
• Patterson v. Sodders
  167 So. 2d 789· Fla. 2d DCA· 1964-10-02 ·cited 6×
  In this bastardy support case, the defendant-appellant challenged an order denying his motion to amend his answer and denying his motion for summary final decree. The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed, holding that the four-year statute of limitations under the 1959 enact
• France v. Ross
  165 So. 2d 780· Fla. 3d DCA· 1964-06-30 ·cited 6×
  An engineering firm sued an architect for unpaid professional services on an open account. The defendant architect appealed a judgment for $12,590, arguing the claim was barred by either a one-year statute of limitations for wages or a three-year statute for parol contracts. The
• Rinzler v. Westinghouse Elec. Corp. & Westinghouse Elec. Supply Co.
  333 F.2d 719· 5th Cir.· 1964-06-24 ·cited 6×
  The court held that active fraudulent concealment by defendants tolls the statute of limitations for antitrust claims.
• LEH v. Gen. Petroleum Corp.
  330 F.2d 288· 9th Cir.· 1964-04-02 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the one-year California statute of limitations for penalties applies to federal antitrust treble damage actions accruing before the federal four-year statute, as construed by California courts.
• Schiffman v. The United States
  319 F.2d 886· Ct. Cl.· 1963-07-12 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claim for the difference in retirement pay was not barred by the statute of limitations because the finality of the initial administrative decision was undermined by subsequent changes in policy and law, allowing for reconsideration.
• Bond v. Golden
  273 F.2d 265· 10th Cir.· 1959-11-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claim was barred by the statute of limitations because the attempted service of process was defective and the defendant's absence from the state did not toll the limitations period.
• Ford A. Kalil and John Kalil v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  271 F.2d 550· 5th Cir.· 1959-11-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Tax Court correctly found fraud with intent to evade tax, which tolled the statute of limitations for assessing deficiencies.
• Whale Harbor SPA, Inc. v. Wood
  266 F.2d 953· 5th Cir.· 1959-05-15 ·cited 6×
  The court held that balance sheets showing a corporate debt as a liability constitute a written acknowledgment sufficient to toll the statute of limitations under Florida law.
• Est. of Charles B. Wolf v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  264 F.2d 82· 3d Cir.· 1959-02-20 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Commonwealth has standing to raise the statute of limitations for estate tax purposes, but remanded for consideration of the Soldiers' and Sailors' Civil Relief Act's effect on certain claims.
• The Univ. OF Miami, Inc. v. Matthews
  97 So. 2d 111· Fla.· 1957-09-13 ·cited 6×
  In this workers' compensation case, the Florida Supreme Court held that the statute of limitations for filing a compensation claim is not tolled by an employer's payment of regular wages during an employee's absences from work unless the employer knew or should have known that th
• Grengs v. Twentieth Century FOX Film Corp.
  232 F.2d 325· 7th Cir.· 1956-04-16 ·cited 6×
• Norvin Rieser v. The Baltimore & Ohio R.R. Co.
  228 F.2d 563· 2d Cir.· 1955-12-02 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' claims against B&O were time-barred by the statute of limitations, even under generous assumptions.
• Producers Releasing Corp. de Cuba v. Pathe Indus., Inc.
  184 F.2d 1021· 2d Cir.· 1950-11-06 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the present suit was timely brought under Section 23 of the New York Civil Practice Act because the dismissal of the former suit was not for neglect to prosecute.
• Missco Homestead Ass'n, Inc. v. United States
  185 F.2d 280· 8th Cir.· 1950-11-01 ·cited 6×
  A corporation's classification as a moneyed, business, or commercial entity for bankruptcy purposes depends on state classification, conferred powers, and character of activities, not solely its state-issued charter.
• Zellan v. Cole
  183 F.2d 139· D.C. Cir.· 1950-05-15 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the parties' actions indicated the contract was a promise to maintain a dry basement, and the statute of limitations began to run when the contractor abandoned efforts to fix it.
• Scroggin Farms Corp. v. McFADDEN
  165 F.2d 10· 8th Cir.· 1948-01-07 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the appellant's claims against both the Commodity Credit Corporation and McFadden were barred by the statute of limitations and, on the merits, that McFadden, as a good faith second assignee, could retain the warehouse receipts.
• McCRORY Stores Corp. v. LEE
  157 Fla. 274· Fla.· 1946-04-09 ·cited 6×
  McCrory Stores Corporation challenged the Comptroller's attempt to audit its tax returns for 1941 and 1942 beyond the statutory 18-month limitations period. The Florida Supreme Court held that the statute of limitations on the Comptroller's right to examine tax returns is not tol
• State OF Okla. ex rel. Phillips v. Am. Book Co.
  144 F.2d 585· 10th Cir.· 1944-08-15 ·cited 6×
  A state may maintain an action in its own name without a relator, as the right to sue is inherent in its sovereignty.
• Thompson v. Gallien
  127 F.2d 664· 5th Cir.· 1942-04-29 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the prior suit against the railroad company tolled the statute of limitations for the current suit against the trustee, and that the trustee was negligent in parking a freight car without warning.
• Garvy v. Wilder
  121 F.2d 714· 7th Cir.· 1941-03-27 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the statute of limitations barred recovery of interest on a statutory liability, as the liability for interest itself had expired.
• Reinschmidt v. Crosby
  98 Fla. 365· Fla.· 1929-08-01 ·cited 6×
  This case involves a common law action for damages for trespass to real estate. The court affirmed the lower court's judgment in favor of the defendant, finding no error in the rulings regarding the plaintiff's pleadings and the statute of limitations.
• Tolliver v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr. (Hillsborough County)
  2023 WL 4488294· M.D. Fla.· 2025-04-28 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the petition for writ of habeas corpus was time-barred under AEDPA and must be dismissed.
• Bove v. Naples HMA, LLC
  196 So. 3d 411· Fla. 2d DCA· 2016-04-01 ·cited 5×
  Mrs. Bove appealed the dismissal of her medical negligence complaint against a hospital and two physicians for failing to file within Florida's two-year statute of limitations. The court affirmed dismissal, holding that Mrs. Bove was bound by her own admission in the notice of in
• Ervans v. The City OF Venice
  169 So. 3d 267· Fla. 2d DCA· 2015-07-10 ·cited 5×
  Larry Ervans appealed the dismissal of his false arrest and false imprisonment claims against the City of Venice and a police officer. The court reversed, holding that the complaint did not conclusively establish that the statute of limitations barred the claims because it failed
• Hussey v. Collier Cnty.
  158 So. 3d 661· Fla. 2d DCA· 2014-11-14 ·cited 5×·via Tolling Provisions
  Property owners challenged a county's amendment to its comprehensive land use plan that redesignated their rural property as Sending Lands, prohibiting mining and restricting development. The court reversed dismissal of their Bert J. Harris Private Property Rights Act claim, find
• Gonzalez v. Tracy
  994 So. 2d 402· Fla. 3d DCA· 2008-10-22 ·cited 5×
  Plaintiff Julia Gonzalez appealed summary judgment dismissing her medical malpractice claim against podiatrist Dr. Tracy and Westchester General Hospital for allegedly severing a nerve during unnecessary lipoma removal surgery. The court reversed, holding that the statute of limi
• Federico Labrador v. State
  Fla. 3d DCA· 2007-08-15 ·cited 5×
  An amended information charging organized scheme to defraud filed more than three years after the underlying criminal activity is time-barred under the three-year limitations period for third-degree felonies, where the charge alleges a new and distinct crime with different statut
• White Constr. Co., Inc. v. State
  860 So. 2d 1064· Fla. 1st DCA· 2003-12-09 ·cited 5×·via Equitable Tolling
  White Construction Company appealed the State Arbitration Board's denial of its arbitration request against the Florida Department of Transportation, arguing the 820-day filing deadline should be tolled or waived. The court affirmed the Board's decision, holding that the contract
• Popps v. Popps
  806 So. 2d 583· Fla. 4th DCA· 2002-01-30 ·cited 5×
  Dismissal with prejudice was an abuse of discretion because the plaintiff ultimately complied with statutory presuit procedures after filing a second notice of intent, and the trial court's dismissal failed to adequately consider the constitutional right of access to the courts.
• Palmer v. Fortune Ins. Co.
  776 So. 2d 1019· Fla. 5th DCA· 2001-01-19 ·cited 5×·via Tolling Provisions
  Palmer, as personal representative of her deceased son's estate, sought statutory interest and attorney fees in a PIP insurance dispute against Fortune Insurance Company. The court held that Fortune's failure to pay or deny the PIP claim within 30 days of receiving written notice
• Coffaro v. Hillsborough Cnty. Hosp. Auth.
  752 So. 2d 712· Fla. 2d DCA· 2000-02-25 ·cited 5×
  Coffaro appeals summary judgments dismissing her medical malpractice claims as time-barred. The court reverses, holding that a 90-day purchased extension under section 766.104(2) is not included when calculating the 60-day filing period under section 766.106(4), and certifies a q
• Herder v. First Union Nat'l Bank OF Fla.
  708 So. 2d 997· Fla. 3d DCA· 1998-03-25 ·cited 5×
• Nolden v. Nolden
  650 So. 2d 84· Fla. 5th DCA· 1995-01-13 ·cited 5×
  This case concerns whether a debt barred by the statute of limitations can be revived by a written acknowledgment. The court held that a written acknowledgment of a debt, even if not intended to waive the statute of limitations or delivered to the creditor, can revive the debt. T
• Gemeral Earnest Berry, Jr. v. CIGNA/Rsi-Cigna
  975 F.2d 1188· 5th Cir.· 1992-10-29 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by dismissing the plaintiff's suit for failure to prosecute without a clear record of delay or consideration of lesser sanctions.
• Snair v. City of Clearwater
  787 F. Supp. 1401· M.D. Fla.· 1992-03-17 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the pension plan's 1978 amendments, which increased benefits and reduced vesting periods, were significant enough to subject the plan to ADEA scrutiny, and that evidence of discriminatory intent regarding hiring older workers precluded summary judgment.
• Farancz v. ST. Mary's Hosp., Inc.
  585 So. 2d 1151· Fla. 4th DCA· 1991-09-18 ·cited 5×
  Farancz sued his former employer, St. Mary's Hospital, for employment discrimination under Florida's Human Rights Act. The court affirmed dismissal of his claim, holding that the statute of limitations for filing a civil action was not tolled by the administrative complaint proce
• Webb v. Chambly
  584 So. 2d 216· Fla. 4th DCA· 1991-08-21 ·cited 5×
  Plaintiffs in a personal injury action appealed a summary judgment dismissing their claims as time-barred under Florida's statutes of limitations. The court held that although plaintiffs filed their original action within the prescribed period, their voluntary dismissal and subse
• Murphy v. Klein Tools, Inc.
  935 F.2d 1127· 10th Cir.· 1991-06-07 ·cited 5×
  A dismissal for failure to comply with the statute of limitations, when entered with prejudice by a federal court, operates as an adjudication on the merits and is res judicata, barring a subsequent action on the same claim.
• McGREGOR v. United States
  933 F.2d 156· 2d Cir.· 1991-05-15 ·cited 5×
  The court held that failure to serve the Attorney General within 120 days under Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(j) is not excused by "good cause" absent government misconduct, and filing a second complaint after a Rule 4(j) dismissal does not toll the statute of limitations.
• Tolliver v. Xerox Corp.
  918 F.2d 1052· 2d Cir.· 1990-11-14 ·cited 5×
  The timely filing of an administrative charge by named plaintiffs in a putative class action under the ADEA satisfies the charge filing obligation for all members of the class, even after class decertification.
• Kedzierski v. Kedzierski
  899 F.2d 681· 7th Cir.· 1990-04-12 ·cited 5×
  The court held that a plaintiff's claims, as pleaded in the complaint, were time-barred by the applicable statute of limitations, and later-raised arguments not present in the complaint could not save the claim.
• Bowers v. Transportacion Maritima Mexicana, S.A.
  901 F.2d 258· 2d Cir.· 1990-04-09 ·cited 5×·via Equitable Tolling
  The court held that TMM, having ignored MPPAA dispute resolution procedures, is not entitled to a judicial determination of its employer status under the MPPAA.
• Puckett v. Tenn. Eastman Co.
  889 F.2d 1481· 6th Cir.· 1989-11-07 ·cited 5×·via Equitable Tolling
  The court affirmed the dismissal of all claims, holding that the state law claim was time-barred due to an election of remedies, the Title VII claim was properly dismissed for failure to obtain a right-to-sue letter, and the RICO claim failed for lack of separate entities and an
• Aldahonda-Rivera v. Parke Davis & Co.
  882 F.2d 590· 1st Cir.· 1989-08-18 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the District Court properly dismissed the plaintiff's complaint as time-barred under Puerto Rico law, and that the statute of limitations was not tolled.