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

• Wallie W. Mattice v. Messer
  493 F.2d 498· 8th Cir.· 1974-03-14
  The court held that the trial court properly applied the statute of limitations, and the action was barred.
• Agustin Viola v. United States
  483 F.2d 1209· D.C. Cir.· 1973-06-13
  The majority reversed the district court's decision, finding the applicant eligible for death benefits.
• United States v. Harris Tr. & Sav. Bank
  470 F.2d 6· 7th Cir.· 1972-05-19
  The court held that the decedent's two-thirds interest in the trust, which accrued upon the death of her brothers without issue, constituted a base or determinable fee and was includable in her gross estate for federal estate tax purposes.
• M. Bender & SON, Inc. v. W. 16TH St. Realty Corp.
  458 F.2d 1316· 7th Cir.· 1972-04-10
• Johnson v. Grim-Smith Hosp.
  453 F.2d 1253· 8th Cir.· 1972-01-25
  The court held that the trial court correctly granted summary judgment because the statute of limitations was not tolled, even accepting plaintiff's asserted facts.
• Chicago & N. W. Ry. Co. v. The United States
  453 F.2d 759· Ct. Cl.· 1972-01-21
  The court held that the statute of limitations was tolled by mandatory administrative proceedings and that the plaintiff waived the defense by failing to raise it during those proceedings.
• Nolan Delbert Wimberley v. Finch
  446 F.2d 888· 9th Cir.· 1971-08-13
  The specific 60-day appeal period for social security benefits under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) applies, not the general tolling statute for those under disability.
• In re Yale Express Sys., Inc. v. Nogg
  438 F.2d 101· 2d Cir.· 1971-02-05
  The court held that the subcontractor's mechanic's lien rights are preserved and will not be lost due to the passage of time, despite the Chapter X reorganization proceedings.
• Meeker v. United States
  437 F.2d 69· 8th Cir.· 1971-01-25
  The court held that the plaintiff's claim was barred by the statute of limitations because service on the Commissioner of Public Safety and mailing of notice to the nonresident defendant were not both completed within the statutory period.
• Thomson Phosphate Co. v. Atl. Coast Line R.R. Co.
  434 F.2d 180· 2d Cir.· 1970-11-24
  The court held that the Interstate Commerce Commission's interpretation of its own rule regarding reopening informal complaints was not arbitrary or clearly erroneous, and thus the shipper's formal complaint was timely filed.
• United States v. 371.94 Acres OF Land
  431 F.2d 975· 6th Cir.· 1970-09-22
  The court held that the State of Tennessee's actions, including protests and tax payments by the landowners, tolled the statute of limitations for adverse possession, preventing the State from acquiring title to the disputed tracts.
• Westchester Fire Ins. Co. v. Paul Sperling dba Sperlings Dress Shop
  421 F.2d 141· 9th Cir.· 1970-01-13
  The court held that the time limitation for filing suit under an insurance policy is extended by the period allowed for the insurer to accept proof of loss.
• Dusan Ostojic v. Brueckmann
  405 F.2d 302· 7th Cir.· 1968-12-19
  The court held that under Indiana law, a medical malpractice action is barred by the statute of limitations if filed more than two years after the termination of the physician-patient relationship or the plaintiff's discovery of the injury.
• Ruffner v. The S.S. Costa Rica
  377 F.2d 709· 2d Cir.· 1967-05-12
  The court held that the appellant's failure to allege sufficient facts for an estoppel claim within the court-ordered timeframe, and the lack of evidence supporting estoppel on the record, meant the statute of limitations defense was dispositive.
• The First Nat'l Bank OF Live OAK v. Davis
  193 So. 2d 228· Fla. 1st DCA· 1966-12-29
  This case concerns whether a partial payment by the maker of a note tolls the statute of limitations for the endorsers. The court held that the endorsement contract is separate from the maker's contract and, being unsealed, is subject to a shorter statute of limitations that is n
• The Williamson-Dickie Mfg. Co. v. Mann Overall Co., Inc.
  359 F.2d 450· C.C.P.A.· 1966-05-05
  The court held that the cancellation counterclaim was untimely because the required fee was not paid within the statutory five-year period, and that the opposition to the GOLDEN HORSESHOE registration should be dismissed due to no likelihood of confusion.
• Slack v. Stiner
  358 F.2d 65· 5th Cir.· 1966-03-18
  The court held that the original plaintiffs, as underwriters or dealers, could not maintain a class action for violations of the Securities Act of 1933, and that the added plaintiffs were barred by the statute of limitations.
• Young v. Williamson
  169 So. 2d 856· Fla. 2d DCA· 1964-12-16
  In this legal malpractice case, the Florida Court of Appeal reversed a judgment on the pleadings that had been entered in favor of defendant-attorneys based on a statute of limitations defense. The court held that a judgment on the pleadings was premature because the plaintiff wa
• McMANAMAN v. T. W. & C. D. Sheridan Co.
  328 F.2d 676· 6th Cir.· 1964-02-22
  The court held that the plaintiff's action was barred by the Michigan statute of limitations because the defendant foreign corporation had been available for service of process through its legal counsel for a period exceeding three years.
• Jones v. Boyd Transfer & Storage Co.
  323 F.2d 998· 8th Cir.· 1963-10-30
  The court held that the plaintiff's action was barred by the statute of limitations and laches, affirming the trial court's judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
• Dower v. Thomas J. Bomar for Kitimat Corp.
  313 F.2d 596· 5th Cir.· 1963-02-13
  The court held that the bankruptcy court had summary jurisdiction to adjudicate title to the property and that the trustee's action was timely brought under federal law, despite state statute of limitations concerns.
• Smith v. Smith
  148 So. 2d 287· Fla. 1st DCA· 1963-01-08
  In this 1963 Florida divorce appeal, the wife challenges a divorce decree granted to the husband on grounds of desertion, arguing that her prior filing of a separate maintenance action in Ohio should have tolled the desertion period. The court affirmed the divorce decree, holding
• Leatha Evans Hardwick v. Smith
  286 F.2d 81· 10th Cir.· 1961-01-05
  The court held that the action was not commenced within the statute of limitations because the summons was not delivered for service before the statutory period expired.
• Sera Linke v. Sorenson
  276 F.2d 151· 8th Cir.· 1960-04-07
  The court held that fraudulent concealment of a cause of action does not create a new, independent cause of action, but rather tolls the statute of limitations for the original claim.
• Frownfelter v. Int'l Shoe Co. & Shoenterprise Corp.
  273 F.2d 338· 5th Cir.· 1960-01-07
  The court held that repeated broken promises do not toll the statute of limitations after the defrauded party has discovered the fraud.
• Germana E. Prado del Castillo v. United States
  272 F.2d 326· 9th Cir.· 1959-11-19
  The court held that the six-year statute of limitations for filing suit on National Service Life Insurance claims had expired, and the extension of administrative claim filing time did not implicitly extend the judicial filing period.
• Silva v. Sandia Corp.
  246 F.2d 758· 10th Cir.· 1957-06-24
  The court held that continued employment and other payments after compensation benefits ceased did not constitute conduct that would reasonably lead the employee to believe compensation would be paid, thus the statute of limitations was not tolled.
• Spurgin v. Mixon
  246 F.2d 932· 10th Cir.· 1957-06-12
  The court held that the statute of limitations was not tolled by the defendant's temporary absences from the state because service of process was possible during those absences.
• United States v. Siegel
  225 F.2d 869· 9th Cir.· 1955-09-08
  The court held that the suit was barred by the statute of limitations because the desertion listing did not toll the limitations period.
• Burkman v. Taran
  4 Fla. Supp. 182· Dade Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1953-11-02
  Minnesota sought to recover over $6,000 in state income tax assessed against a Florida resident for 1944. The court held that a state may maintain an action in another state's courts to collect taxes owed to it, but dismissed the action because it was barred by Florida's three-ye
• City Nat. Bank of Fairmont v. Fid. Mut. Life Ins. Co.
  206 F.2d 531· 4th Cir.· 1953-08-08
  The court held that the statute of limitations was tolled by an injunction and by the delayed discovery of the fraud, making the Bank's suit timely.
• Buchan v. Pat's Plumbing
  4 Fla. Supp. 12· Fla. Industrial Comm'n· 1952-10-09
  The court held that the claim for workmen's compensation benefits was not barred by the statute of limitations due to the claimant's mental incompetence and the tolling provision for individuals without a guardian.
• Weinstein v. SEA View, Inc.
  188 F.2d 116· 5th Cir.· 1951-04-13
  The court held that the statute allowing recovery of gambling losses is remedial, not penal, and therefore subject to a six-year statute of limitations, not one year.
• Linard v. Pa. R. Co.
  181 F.2d 342· 6th Cir.· 1950-04-21
  The court held that an action for damages caused by fraud in obtaining a release for personal injuries is barred by the statute of limitations, as it is essentially an action sounding in tort for the original injury.
• Burdick-Baron Co. v. Swift & Co.
  180 F.2d 424· 5th Cir.· 1950-03-09
  The court held that the trial court erred in dismissing the case based on the statute of limitations, as the plaintiff's amended complaint related back to the original filing date due to a prior agreement and a Texas statute.
• Falk v. Levy
  180 F.2d 562· 2d Cir.· 1950-02-24
  The court held that usurious notes do not extinguish prior valid obligations and that payments on usurious notes can toll the statute of limitations on the original debt.
• Janeway v. Artusse
  159 F.2d 261· 10th Cir.· 1947-01-07
  The court held that the payee's testimony regarding a payment was inadmissible, and the endorsement alone was insufficient to toll the statute of limitations.
• Kicklighter v. N.Y. Life Ins. Co.
  157 F.2d 783· 5th Cir.· 1946-11-06
  The court held that the evidence presented no issue of fact as to the bar of the statute of limitations, and the judgment should be affirmed.
• Anderson v. Moser
  156 F.2d 408· 7th Cir.· 1946-06-24
  The court held that the plaintiff receiver failed to meet the burden of proving he was out of state as required by Indiana law to pursue claims against estate distributees.
• Vandevoir v. Southeastern Greyhound Lines
  152 F.2d 150· 7th Cir.· 1945-11-30
  A corporation's residence is solely its state of incorporation, and operating in another state does not confer residence there for purposes of tolling statutes of limitations.
• United Distillers Prods. Corp. v. Bowles
  148 F.2d 345· Emer. Ct. App.· 1945-03-26
  The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to review an order denying a request for reconsideration of a protest denial, and that the complaint was untimely filed.
• Ely Const. Co. v. Town of Timmonsville
  138 F.2d 739· 4th Cir.· 1943-11-08
  The court held that the town was not liable on the promissory note because its issuance was unauthorized and barred by the statute of limitations.
• United States v. Gayne
  137 F.2d 522· 2d Cir.· 1943-07-12
  The court held that the statute of limitations was tolled by the taxpayer's waivers, making the action timely.
• Northport IRR. Dist. v. Henry Wilcox & SON
  131 F.2d 113· 8th Cir.· 1942-11-04
  The court held that while warrants issued against a prior year's levy were void due to lack of authority, the district was still liable for the money received and used for its lawful obligations under a theory of money had and received.
• Gillespie v. Yell Cnty.
  124 F.2d 632· 8th Cir.· 1942-01-05
  The court held that the statute of limitations was tolled by the county's recognition of the debt, and that the county's issuance of invalid bonds to fund pre-existing debt did not violate constitutional provisions prohibiting contracts in excess of revenue, allowing recovery for
• Bee Dee Mgmt. Co. v. Kenyon
  122 F.2d 299· 10th Cir.· 1941-08-01
  The court held that the unsecured claim was barred by the statute of limitations, but the secured claim, based on a note and deed of trust, should have been allowed as it represented valid advances for the bankrupt's benefit and was not fraudulent.
• Germo Mfg. Co. v. St. Lucie Cnty.
  129 Fla. 303· Fla.· 1937-09-20
  Germo Manufacturing Company sued St. Lucie County for payment of goods sold and delivered over several years, with the latest charges dated November 30, 1931. The county pleaded the three-year statute of limitations, and the trial court sustained a demurrer to plaintiff's replica
• In & for New Castle Cnty. Gibralt Cap. Corp.
  Del. Ch.· ·via Equitable Tolling
  The Court denied the defendants' motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction over MFC, finding that the plaintiff had established jurisdiction under the conspiracy theory. The Court also denied the motion to dismiss the disclosure claims, the claim for appointment of a re