Ancala Holdings, L.L.C. v. Price
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partBybee, Circuit Judge
I agree with the majority’s finding that the district court properly dismissed Ancala’s claims as to the Barton fees. However, I disagree with the majority’s finding that the district court properly dismissed Ancala’s claims for breach of failure to operate the golf course as a premium private country club. For this reason, I respectfully dissent.
It is a generally recognized principle that “where a contract provides for continuing performance over a period of time, each breach may begin the running of the statute anew such that accrual occurs continuously.” 54 C.J.S. Limitations of Actions §…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Airco Alloys Division v. Niagara Mohawk Power Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1980
- Hi-Lite Products Company v. American Home Products CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1993
- Singer Co., Link Simulation Systems Division v. Baltimore Gas & Electric Co.Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1989
- Thorpe v. SchoenbrunSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
- Indian Territory Illuminating Oil Co. v. RosamondSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1941
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.