Legal Opinion
Heritage Marketing and Insurance Services, Inc. v. Chrustawka
California Court of Appeal
Decided February 29, 2008No. G037240PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
RYLAARSDAM, J.
Defendants Bradley J. Chrustawka, Anjanette Chrustawka, nee Price (Price), and Katherine M. Matonic obtained summary adjudication of five causes of action on the grounds they were barred by the applicable statute of limitations and were not tolled by Code of Civil Procedure section 351 (section 351). Because those were the only causes of action alleged against the latter two, the trial court entered judgment in their favor, leaving the action pending against Chrustawka only. Plaintiffs appeal, contending section 351 tolled the various limitations periods and entry of…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Edwards v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Bendix Autolite Corp. v. Midwesco Enterprises, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Roberts v. City of PalmdaleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993
- Lewis I. Abramson World Coin Partners v. Joel F. BrownsteinCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
- 580 Folsom Associates v. Prometheus Development Co.California Court of Appeal · 1990
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Wilson v. HaysDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2017
- First Tennessee Bank Nat. Assn. v. NewhamNebraska Supreme Court · 2015
- Dan Clark Family Ltd. Partnership v. MiramontesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
- Arrow Highway Steel, Inc. v. DubinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2020
- In re: Capital Options, LLCUnited States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit · 2016
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.