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

• Waddell v. USS Agri-Chemicals
  523 So. 2d 683· Fla. 1st DCA· 1988-03-25 ·cited 2×
  Incarceration tolls the running of the two-year period under section 440.15(3)(b)3.a., Florida Statutes, during which wage-loss benefits terminate unless payable for at least three consecutive months.
• Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Cureton
  842 F.2d 887· 6th Cir.· 1988-03-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Tennessee savings statute does not apply when the original action was not timely commenced under Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 3 due to failure to properly serve process.
• Davis v. Smith's Transfer, Inc.
  841 F.2d 139· 6th Cir.· 1988-03-02 ·cited 2×·via Equitable Tolling
  A voluntary dismissal of a hybrid § 301 suit does not toll the six-month statute of limitations, and state saving statutes cannot override federal policy.
• Vojislav Pejic v. Hughes Helicopters, Inc.
  840 F.2d 667· 9th Cir.· 1988-02-24 ·cited 2×·via Equitable Tolling
  The court held that the employee's claims for breach of contract and duty of fair representation were time-barred, and he failed to establish a prima facie case for national origin or age discrimination, and his ERISA claim was properly dismissed.
• Chamness v. United States
  835 F.2d 1350· 11th Cir.· 1988-01-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the mother's knowledge of her daughter's injury did not start the statute of limitations because she did not know the cause of the injury until a television program alerted her to the potential link between labor drugs and the harm.
• Padgett v. State
  519 So. 2d 663· Fla. 4th DCA· 1988-01-13 ·cited 2×
  Kenneth Padgett, an attorney, was convicted of grand theft for retaining settlement funds belonging to a minor ward. On appeal, Padgett challenged the conviction based on statute of limitations, alleging the offense occurred in 1978-1979, but the court affirmed, holding the wrong
• 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.
• Caran v. Bowen
  834 F.2d 720· 8th Cir.· 1987-12-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the claimant's action was untimely filed and barred because it was not filed within the extended period granted by the Secretary, and the filing deadline is a statute of limitations that was not tolled.
• Hughes v. Mayo Clinic
  834 F.2d 713· 8th Cir.· 1987-12-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 3 governs the commencement date of the action, making the new state statute requiring an expert affidavit inapplicable.
• Smith v. Local 7898
  834 F.2d 93· 4th Cir.· 1987-11-30 ·cited 2×·via Equitable Tolling
  A union's honest, mistaken conduct in interpreting a collective bargaining agreement or relying on informal advice does not violate its duty of fair representation.
• Stark v. Wash. Star Co.
  833 F.2d 1025· D.C. Cir.· 1987-11-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the claimant failed to file his claim within the statutory period and the employer did not have sufficient knowledge to toll the statute of limitations.
• Smith v. Smith
  830 F.2d 11· 2d Cir.· 1987-09-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the doctrine of equitable estoppel is inapplicable to the case, affirming the dismissal of the complaint as time-barred.
• Brown v. State
  510 So. 2d 361· Fla. 3d DCA· 1987-07-28 ·cited 2×
  The court held that neither a juvenile 'pickup' order nor the filing of a delinquency petition constitutes the commencement of prosecution for purposes of the statute of limitations.
• Davis v. DOW Chem. Corp.
  819 F.2d 231· 9th Cir.· 1987-06-05 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the discovery rule applies to Arizona's wrongful death statute of limitations when its application would otherwise bar an action before it could reasonably be discovered, to avoid constitutional infirmity.
• Dixie Transp., Inc. v. Kellom
  507 So. 2d 757· Fla. 1st DCA· 1987-05-21 ·cited 2×
  Dixie Transport and its carrier appealed a workers' compensation order directing payment of transportation costs for medical treatment that had been previously awarded but not itemized. The court affirmed, holding that the statute of limitations does not bar payment of costs inci
• Jane Does 1-100 v. Omodt
  813 F.2d 910· 8th Cir.· 1987-03-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred in applying Wilson v. Garcia retroactively to bar the plaintiff's claim, as the plaintiff could have reasonably relied on prior circuit precedent.
• NAN Sing Marine Co., Ltd. v. The United States
  811 F.2d 1495· Fed. Cir.· 1987-02-17 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a breach of contract claim that accrued and was extinguished by the statute of limitations under the Suits in Admiralty Act before the Contract Disputes Act became effective was not revived by the Contract Disputes Act.
• Tarver v. E. Airlines
  502 So. 2d 48· Fla. 1st DCA· 1987-02-04 ·cited 2×
  Tarver appealed a workers' compensation deputy commissioner's order denying his petition to modify an earlier injury award. The court affirmed the finding that his condition had not worsened but reversed the statute of limitations bar to medical bills, holding that his timely pet
• Marquis v. United States Sugar Corp.
  652 F. Supp. 598· S.D. Fla.· 1987-01-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' claims were not barred by the statute of limitations, implied antitrust immunity, or failure to exhaust administrative remedies, and that a private cause of action exists under the Wagner-Peyser Act and § 1981 covers national origin discriminat
• Chahram Pahlavi v. Petros Palandjian
  809 F.2d 938· 1st Cir.· 1987-01-21 ·cited 2×
  The court held that Palandjian's counterclaims were time-barred and not compulsory, and that Pahlavi was entitled to summary judgment on his claim regarding the dishonored check, with pre-judgment interest awarded from the date of dishonor.
• Newport Trucking & S. Fire Adjusters v. Gonzalez
  497 So. 2d 690· Fla. 1st DCA· 1986-10-30 ·cited 2×
  Newport Trucking and Southern Fire Adjusters appealed a workers' compensation order awarding benefits to Omar Gonzalez for an exacerbated back injury from a 1981 slip-and-fall accident. The court affirmed the award, holding that medical treatment in 1983 tolled the statute of lim
• Geosearch, Inc. v. Hodel
  801 F.2d 1250· 10th Cir.· 1986-09-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' action was time-barred under the Mineral Lands Leasing Act and Interior Department regulations, as the petition for reconsideration did not toll the limitations period.
• United States v. Holloway
  798 F.2d 175· 6th Cir.· 1986-08-18 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the statute of limitations was tolled by the offer of compromise and did not begin to run again until the offer was formally rejected, and that the government acted in due course.
• Rich v. Dir., Off. of Workers' Comp. Programs, United States Dep't of Labor
  798 F.2d 432· 11th Cir.· 1986-08-14 ·cited 2×·via Equitable Tolling
  The court held that the petition for review was untimely because it was filed after the sixty-day statutory period, and equitable tolling was not warranted.
• Ellenbogen v. Rider Maint. Corp.
  794 F.2d 768· 2d Cir.· 1986-06-24 ·cited 2×
  A federal court need not borrow the six-month service requirement from § 10(b) of the NLRA for hybrid § 301/fair representation suits; Federal Rules of Civil Procedure govern service timelines.
• Bornstein v. Richard E. Poulos in Bankr. of Blier Cedar Co., Inc.
  793 F.2d 444· 1st Cir.· 1986-06-20 ·cited 2×
  Summary judgment was properly granted on claims against Bornstein as they were time-barred, but summary judgment was improperly granted on claims against Parent, as the statute of limitations was tolled due to his fiduciary duty.
• ST. Louis Home Insulators v. Burroughs Corp.
  793 F.2d 954· 8th Cir.· 1986-06-18 ·cited 2×
  The district court erred in dismissing the plaintiffs' complaint with prejudice for failing to plead fraud and tolling of the statute of limitations with sufficient particularity.
• Shockley v. Vt. State Colleges
  793 F.2d 478· 2d Cir.· 1986-06-18 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment because factual issues remained regarding equitable estoppel and the statute of limitations.
• Wolfe v. Commercial Union Ins.
  792 F.2d 87· 7th Cir.· 1986-06-04 ·cited 2×
  The Indiana Workmen's Compensation Act provides the exclusive remedy for an employee seeking benefits for injuries sustained during employment, and the Industrial Board has exclusive jurisdiction over such claims, including those involving allegations of fraud that would toll the
• Elisalde v. Int'l Ass'n OF MacHinists
  792 F.2d 114· 8th Cir.· 1986-05-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the filing of a complaint tolls the six-month statute of limitations for hybrid section 301/fair representation actions, making the plaintiff's action timely.
• Warren v. Louie L. Wainwright
  483 So. 2d 820· Fla. 3d DCA· 1986-02-25 ·cited 2×
  Appellate counsel is not required to raise on appeal issues that are clearly without merit, and a habeas petitioner must demonstrate actual prejudice from counsel's alleged failures to establish ineffective assistance.
• Barry v. Honoria Donnelly
  781 F.2d 1040· 4th Cir.· 1986-01-17 ·cited 2×
  The court held that genuine issues of material fact exist regarding equitable estoppel, precluding summary judgment on the statute of limitations defense.
• State v. Essie Mae Rose
  475 So. 2d 1334· Fla. 2d DCA· 1985-09-27 ·cited 2×
  The Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services appealed a trial court's ruling striking its claim for public assistance payments against Bee Johnson's estate. The court held that filing a caveat does not preserve a public assistance claim under Florida Statutes § 40
• Boyd v. Merrill Lynch
  611 F. Supp. 218· S.D. Fla.· 1985-06-18 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claims under Section 12(2) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 were not time-barred, but reserved ruling on the motion to compel arbitration pending further evidence.
• Donovan v. Dist. 1199
  760 F.2d 440· 2d Cir.· 1985-04-23 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a union's non-compliance with a subpoena tolls the statute of limitations for the Department of Labor to bring suit to set aside an election.
• Cook v. G.D. Searle & Co., Inc.
  759 F.2d 800· 10th Cir.· 1985-04-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that Colorado's statute of limitations was not tolled by the plaintiff's prior filing in Iowa, as state law governs tolling in diversity cases absent overriding federal concerns, and Colorado law disfavors tolling in such circumstances.
• Tosti v. City OF LOS Angeles
  754 F.2d 1485· 9th Cir.· 1985-03-04 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Supreme Court's decision in Monell v. New York City Department of Social Services applies retroactively to discriminatory acts predating the decision, and that the statute of limitations was tolled by the pendency of a related class action.
• Harris v. United States Liab. Ins. Co.
  746 F.2d 152· 2d Cir.· 1984-10-12 ·cited 2×
  The court held that New York Civil Practice Law § 205(a) applies to a second suit filed within six months of a prior action's dismissal for lack of justiciable controversy, even if the causes of action differ, as long as both arise from the same transaction or occurrence.
• Brown v. The M.W. Kellogg Co.
  743 F.2d 265· 5th Cir.· 1984-10-04 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Texas architectural/engineer statute of ultimate repose (Tex.Rev.Stat.Ann. art. 5536a) applies to claims for latent diseases and corporate defendants, and is not unconstitutional special legislation.
• Brine v. Paine Webber
  745 F.2d 100· 1st Cir.· 1984-09-28 ·cited 2×
  The estate's claim for dividends paid more than six years before filing suit is barred by the statute of limitations, as any trust created by the 1922 letter was terminated when the stock was delivered to the estate in 1928.
• Calder v. Uwanawich
  449 So. 2d 911· Fla. 3d DCA· 1984-04-24 ·cited 2×
• Mickey L. Stahlman v. The Kroger Co.
  723 F.2d 621· 8th Cir.· 1983-12-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claims were time-barred under the six-month limitation period established in DelCostello v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters.
• Baber v. Clare Edman, M.D.
  719 F.2d 122· 5th Cir.· 1983-11-10 ·cited 2×
  Failure to provide statutory notice before filing a medical malpractice suit requires a stay of proceedings for 60 days, not dismissal of the action.
• Tillman v. City OF Milwaukee
  715 F.2d 354· 7th Cir.· 1983-08-23 ·cited 2×·via Equitable Tolling
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the action for failure to join DILHR, as the EEOC filing requirement is not jurisdictional and DILHR could potentially be joined.
• McCARTY v. First OF Ga. Ins. Co.
  713 F.2d 609· 10th Cir.· 1983-08-04 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the prior dismissal of the breach of contract claim on statute of limitations grounds does not preclude a subsequent tort claim for the insurer's bad faith refusal to pay, provided the insured can prove entitlement to payment and the insurer's bad faith.
• Oran L. Turner v. Evans
  704 F.2d 1212· 11th Cir.· 1983-05-09 ·cited 2×·via Tolling Provisions
  The court is certifying a question of Georgia law to the Supreme Court of Georgia because there is no clear precedent on whether the statute of limitations for personal injury actions is tolled for incarcerated individuals.
• Langager v. Lake Havasu Cmty. Hosp.
  688 F.2d 664· 9th Cir.· 1982-09-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that allegations of intentional concealment or misrepresentation preventing discovery of an injury can toll the statute of limitations under A.R.S. § 12-564(C), creating a question of fact for the jury.
• Appelbaum v. Ceres Land Co.
  687 F.2d 261· 8th Cir.· 1982-08-30 ·cited 2×·via Equitable Tolling
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in exercising jurisdiction over the pendent state claims and that the state Blue Sky claims were properly dismissed as barred by the statute of limitations.
• Brackney v. Combustion Eng'g, Inc.
  674 F.2d 812· 9th Cir.· 1982-04-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court's dismissal of claims against the University of Chicago and the application of the six-year tolling limit for Michael Brackney were not clearly wrong, but vacated the ruling on Combustion Engineering's defense pending a Commerce Clause deter
• Seltzer v. Ashcroft
  675 F.2d 184· 8th Cir.· 1982-04-07 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court should stay the civil rights action pending the outcome of the plaintiff's criminal appeal and consider issues of prosecutorial immunity.