Also known as: toll the statute of limitations · tolled statute of limitations · tolling statute of limitations · tolling · equitable tolling
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A rule or doctrine that suspends or extends the time period within which a claim must be brought. The mechanism pauses the running of the limitations clock when specified conditions such as concealment, reliance, or pendency of another action are present.
Edith underwent surgery at Nova Patient and later discovered a surgical instrument left inside her. The state's two-year limitations period had already expired, yet a state concealment provision extended the filing window. Edith filed in federal district court under diversity jurisdiction. The court applied the state tolling rule and denied the motion to dismiss.
Gabriel demanded that Grove Aviation cause Sterling Space to sue Ridge Jet for defective parts. Grove Aviation deferred action while monitoring an industry arbitration expected to last several months. Five months later Gabriel filed a derivative suit. The court treated the arbitration period as a reasonable basis for tolling and allowed the action to proceed.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Angela sued Clear Finance in federal court alleging unsuitable investment advice. She relied on State X's discovery-based limitations rule that started the clock only after reasonable discovery of the wrong. Clear Finance argued a strict accrual rule barred the claim. The court applied the state discovery rule and denied the motion to dismiss.
O'Keeffe discovered that Snyder possessed paintings she alleged had been stolen decades earlier. State law provided a discovery rule that tolled the limitations period until the owner reasonably could have located the works. O'Keeffe filed suit within the extended period. The court held the action timely under the state tolling provision.
Shady Grove filed a class action against Allstate in federal court. Allstate contended that a state rule limiting class actions also barred tolling of individual claims. The court determined that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 controlled the class issue and that state tolling rules remained applicable on the limitations question.
Former asbestos claimants sought to join a proposed class settlement after the original limitations period had run. The settlement negotiations and court-supervised process provided a basis for tolling under state law. The court applied the state tolling rule to preserve the claims and approved the class-wide resolution.
Yes. Statutes of limitations and their tolling provisions are substantive under the outcome-determination test. Ignoring the state concealment rule would produce a result in federal court materially different from the result in state court.
No. Rule 3 governs only when an action is commenced by filing the complaint. Where no federal rule directly governs tolling, the federal court must apply the relevant state law.
The statute tolls the limitations period for any claim asserted under supplemental jurisdiction while the claim is pending and for thirty days after dismissal unless state law provides a longer period.
…at 470-472 . III The present case is indistinguishable from Ragan . The statutes in both cases require service of process to toll the statute of limitations, and in fact the predecessor to the Oklahoma statute in this case was derived from the predecessor to the Kansas statute in Ragan . See Dr. Koch Vegetable Tea Co. v. Davis , 48 Okla. 14,…