Legal Opinion

Dan Clark Family Ltd. Partnership v. Miramontes

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 3, 2011No. D056064PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*222Opinion

AARON, J.

I

INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff Dan Clark Family Limited Partnership (Dan Clark) appeals from a judgment entered after the trial court sustained defendants’ demurrer to Dan Clark’s third amended complaint, without leave to amend. The trial court concluded that Dan Clark’s causes of action for conversion and claim and delivery were untimely under the three-year statute of limitations that applies to the claims.

On appeal, Dan Clark contends that the trial court erred in finding that the statute of limitations was not tolled pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure1 section 351, which tolls…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Pike v. Bruce Church, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
  2. Blank v. KirwanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
  3. Brown-Forman Distillers Corp. v. New York State Liquor AuthoritySupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  4. Bendix Autolite Corp. v. Midwesco Enterprises, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1988
  5. Ford Motor Co. v. Texas Department of TransportationCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2001

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Wilson v. HaysDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2017
  2. First Tennessee Bank Nat. Assn. v. NewhamNebraska Supreme Court · 2015
  3. Arrow Highway Steel, Inc. v. DubinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2020
  4. In re: Capital Options, LLCUnited States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit · 2016

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API