Skip to Content (Press Enter)

Skip to Nav (Press Enter)

Equitable Tolling

Subscribe to California Appellate Tracker

Thank you for your desire to subscribe to Severson & Werson’s Appellate Tracker Weblog. In order to subscribe, you must provide a valid name and e-mail address. This too will be retained on our server. When you push the “subscribe button”, we will send an electronic mail to the address that you provided asking you to confirm your subscription to our Weblog. By pushing the “subscribe button”, you represent and warrant that you are over the age of 18 years old, are the owner/authorized user of that e-mail address, and are entitled to receive e-mails at that address. Our weblog will retain your name and e-mail address on its server, or the server of its web host. However, we won’t share any of this information with anyone except the Firm’s employees and contractors, except under certain extraordinary circumstances described on our Privacy Policy and (About The Consumer Finance Blog/About the Appellate Tracker Weblog) Page. NOTICE AND AGREEMENT REGARDING E-MAILS AND CALLS/TEXT MESSAGES TO LAND-LINE AND WIRELESS TELEPHONES: By providing your contact information and confirming your subscription in response to the initial e-mail that we send you, you agree to receive e-mail messages from Severson & Werson from time-to-time and understand and agree that such messages are or may be sent by means of automated dialing technology. If you have your email forwarded to other electronic media, including text messages and cellular telephone by way of VoIP, internet, social media, or otherwise, you agree to receive my messages in that way. This may result in charges to you. Your agreement and consent also extend to any other agents, affiliates, or entities to whom our communications are forwarded. You agree that you will notify Severson & Werson in writing if you revoke this agreement and that your revocation will not be effective until you notify Severson & Werson in writing. You understand and agree that you will afford Severson & Werson a reasonable time to unsubscribe you from the website, that the ability to do so depends on Severson & Werson’s press of business and access to the weblog, and that you may still receive one or more emails or communications from weblog until we are able to unsubscribe you.

Following Law Finance Group, LLC v. Key (2023) 14 Cal.5th 932, this decision holds that the 100-day limit on petitioning to vacate a Mandatory Attorney Fee Arbitration award is subject to equitable estoppel and equitable tolling.  It also holds that unless there is already an action pending between the parties, the petition must be served in same manner as a… Read More

Equitable tolling could apply to a plaintiff's pursuit of an action in a foreign court to prevent destruction of evidence needed for proof of plaintiff's substantive claim eventually brought in state court.  It is not necesssary for equitable tolling that the prior suit seek substantive relief that lessens the plaintiff's injury or damage.  The plaintiff need only show notice to… Read More

The Judicial Council had constitutional authority to adopt Emergency Rule 9 extending statutes of limitation by six months due to the COVID-19 pandemic.  Governor Newson's executive order granting the Judicial Council authority to adopt that rule was itself authorized by Gov. Code 8571. Read More

This decision holds that a party seeking to vacate an arbitration award must file a petition to vacate or a response (seeking vacatur) to a petition to confirm an arbitration award within 100 days of service of the arbitration award.  (CCP 1288, 1288.2.)  A response seeking to vacate is untimely if filed beyond that 100 day limit even if filed… Read More

Following ZF Micro Devices, Inc. v. TAT Capital Partners, Ltd. (2016) 5 Cal.App.5th 69, this decision holds that the filing of the complaint tolls the statute of limitations for all claims the defendant pleads in a cross-complaint, whether compulsory or permissive, so long as the cross-claim was not time-barred at the time the complaint was filed.  This limitations tolling doctrine… Read More

If a statute prescribes a time limit within which a petition, appeal or other pleading must be filed, it will be treated as jurisdictional only if Congress clearly states that the time limit is jurisdictional.  Jurisdictional time limits cannot be waived or forfeited, must be raised by courts sua sponte, and do not allow for equitable exceptions.  Here, the Court… Read More

On remand from the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal decides that the plaintiff hospital cannot prevail on its claim of equitable tolling of the statute of limitations to petition for relief from the state agency's decision against it.  The decision clearly stated that it was effective immediately.  The state APA sections (Gov. Code 11521 and 11523) clearly provide that… Read More

Disagreeing with Batze v. Safeway, Inc. (2017) 10 Cal.App.5th 440, this decision holds that Amrican Pipe tolling applies to this later-brought individual suit on the same Labor Code violations alleged in two prior putative class actions, both alleging that Staples misclassified its store managers as exempt employees even though they spent more than 50% of their work time performing functions… Read More

This decision holds that CCP 351, which tolls the statute of limitations while the defendant is absent from the state, is unconstiturional as violative of the dorman Commerce Clause insofar as it tolls the statute of limitations on claims against a defendant who was a California resident when the claim accrued, but later moved permanently out of state.  Here, plaintiff… Read More

This decision reverses an order granting defendants equitable relief from a default and default judgment.  A court’s ability to grant relief under its inherent equitable power is narrower than its ability to grant relief under CCP 473(b)  Equitable relief from a default judgment may be granted only in exceptional circumstances, and the party moving for such relief must make a… Read More

In the exercise of their equitable powers, courts may equitably toll statutes of limitation except when the Legislature has clearly indicated its intent that a limitations period not by extended by equitable tolling.  Gov. Code 11523, which sets a 30-day deadline for filing a petition for administrative mandate to review administrative determinations, does not clearly exclude equitable tolling.  Thus, equitable… Read More

City of San Diego’s ordinance setting a 30-day limitations period on challenges to tax assessments does not deny plaintiffs due process and is not subject to equitable tolling based on a prior suit by a different taxpayer. Read More