Jump to content

California Case Law


Recommended Posts

I'm in state court in California. I'm looking for California appellate cases that afirm that the statute of limitations does indeed bar the jurisdiction of the court in debt actions to back up the state laws that say so.

California Code of Civil Procedure Part 2, Title 2 – The Time Of Commencing Civil Actions:

§312 states:

“Civil actions, without exception, can only be commenced within the periods prescribed in this title, after the cause of action shall have accrued, unless where, in special cases, a different limitation is prescribed by statute.”

§337 states :

“Within four years: 1. An action upon any contract, obligation or liability founded upon an instrument in writing . . ..” (Emphasis added.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm still not sure exactly what you are looking for. If the complaint demonstrates, on its face, that the action is time-barred, you really don't need much in the way of case law unless there is a particular problem such as discovery or accrual. The following is a case that sets forth some general law regarding the statute of limitations and it cites many other cases on the subject: E-Fab, Inc. v. Accountants, Inc. Services (2007) 153 Cal. App. 4th 1308. Hope this helps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read here somewhere that California law does not restart the statute of limitations clock if payments are made after a debt is written off as bad.

I need a California cite that confirms that once the debt is written off as bad any subsequent payments do not reset the statute of limitations clock unless a new written agreement is executed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.