Statute of Limitations

Under Gov. Code 945.3, a person charged with a criminal offense may not bring a claim against a police officer or the police department relating to the charged offence, including any act or omission in the arrest or detention, while the criminal charges are pending in the superior court.  This decision holds that the statute tolls the statute of limitations… Read More

Under the continuing violations doctrine, an employer is liable for actions that took place outside the limitations period if these actions are sufficiently linked to unlawful conduct that occurred within the limitations period.  Here, Blue Fountain subjected the plaintiff to a continuous course of sexual harassment for more than a decade.  When plaintiff finally quit or was terminated, she sued. … Read More

Defendant’s repeated kicks and punches of the plaintiff was sufficient evidence of malice and/or intent to injure, thus providing sufficient justification for a punitive damages award. Read More

For limitations purposes, the client discovered malpractice claim against a lawyer who structured a transaction when the other party to the transaction threatened to sue client based on the transaction’s structure. Read More

Plaintiff is estopped from arguing defendant waived untimeliness of her government claim because she misrepresented in the claim when she learned of her claim, making it seem timely when it was not. Read More

Claims for prenatal injuries to a baby caused by the mother’s exposure to toxic chemicals are governed by the two-year statute of limitations for personal injuries from exposure to toxic chemicals, which includes tolling provisions for minors and for delayed discovery. Read More

American Pipe tolling during the pendency of an initial class action does not toll the statute of limitations for a follow-on class action, but only for individual suits by members of the putative class in the initial class action. Read More

In collections suit, collection agency plaintiff was held to Delaware’s three-year statute of limitations—which was the jurisdiction selected in the credit card account agreement’s choice of law clause—as opposed to the four-year limitations period in California, where the suit was brought. Read More

Under Code of Civil Procedure section 352.1, the statute of limitations is tolled if the claim accrues when the plaintiff is imprisoned in a state prison under a criminal sentence, but not if the plaintiff is held in a county jail or in pre-trial detention. Read More

A local governmental agency may require the pre-suit filing of an administrative claim for childhood sexual abuse, barring a suit if no claim is filed first. Read More

A medical malpractice plaintiff provides adequate notice of a potential medical malpractice claim, as required by Code of Civil Procedure section 364, by mailing a notice of intent to file an action to a physician’s address of record with the Medical Board of California. Read More

The Fair Employment and Housing Act’s one year statute of limitations starts to run from the date of termination of employment of a faculty member, rather than the earlier date on which he was denied tenure for allegedly discriminatory reasons.   Read More

CIVIL PROCEDURE—STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS The last act in a series of sexual abuses remains the date of accrual of the claim for purposes of Gov. Code 901 and 905 requiring, as a condition of suing a government entity, that a claim be filed within 6 months of the accrual of the cause of action.  Following Shirk v. Vista Unified School… Read More

A suit to cancel a deed of trust defendant gave his wholly-owned corporation to avoid paying his debts was barred by the California Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act’s a 7-year statute of repose on fraudulent transfer claims.   Read More

Under Spanish law, the prescriptive period for claims to possession of a Pisarro painting stolen from a German Jewish citizen by the Nazis and later sold to a Spanish museum, may not have expired if the museum had acquired the painting knowing all along that it was stolen.  Read More

Plaintiff's medical malpractice suit was untimely, having been filed more than a year after discovery of the malpractice; formal CCP 364 pre-suit notice from her attorney did not extend the limitations period since plaintiff had already sent her own letter which operated as a pre-suit notice despite not being intended as such.  Read More

Plaintiff’s asbestos-caused mesothelioma claim accrued when she received that diagnosis; her government claim, filed 10 months later, was untimely, so her suit was dismissed.  Read More

American Pipe tolling, an equitable doctrine, cannot override the Securities Act’s explicit three-year statute of repose.  Read More

The claims in pro per plaintiff’s second amended complaint were time-barred because his initial complaint—filed before the limitations period had expired—was so deficient that it did not put the defendant on notice of any claim.  Read More

Plaintiff could not rely on the delayed discovery rule to toll the limitations period on his fraud claim, because memoranda dating to the time of the alleged fraud—which were presented as part of plaintiff’s own evidence—disclosed the very facts which gave rise to the claim.  Read More