Legal Opinion
Kendrick v. City of Eureka
California Court of Appeal
Decided July 19, 2000No. A088104PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
RUVOLO, J.
Introduction
Appellants appeal from the dismissal of their action after respondents’ demurrer was sustained on the ground that the one-year statute of limitations set forth in Code of Civil Procedure section 340, subdivision (3), had expired. Appellants argue that the statute of limitations was tolled by United States Code title 28, section 1367(d), while their claims were pending in federal court. They maintain that the trial court erred in concluding that section 1367(d) did not continue to toll the statute of limitations while they pursued a writ of certiorari in the United…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Deposit Guaranty National Bank v. RoperSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Burnett v. New York Central RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- United States v. CarverSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
- Missouri v. JenkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Sullivan v. Delta Air Lines, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1997
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Reid v. SpazioSupreme Court of Delaware · 2009
- Turner v. KightCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2008
- Hawkins v. Pacific Coast Building Products, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2004
- Smyth v. City of Oakland (In Re Brooks-Hamilton)United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- Smyth v. City of OaklandCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.