in Re: Dallas Etris

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that district court erred in dismissing the plaintiff’s complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction on timeliness grounds, because § 2401(a) of the FTCA is not a jurisdictional statute of limitations
• noting limitations periods may be tolled when “a claimant has been actively misled” (quotations omitted)
• looking “only to the face of [the plaintiff’s] complaint” to evaluate whether equitable tolling is warranted
• “According to long-settled equitable-tolling principles, generally, a litigant seeking equitable tolling bears the burden of establishing two elements: (1) that he has been pursuing his rights diligently, and (2
• “He fails to point to a single action that he took to pursue his rights . . . .”
• “Although timeliness is an affirmative defense, if the allegations show that relief is barred by the applicable statute of limitations, the complaint is subject to dismissal for failure to state a claim.” (citation, ellipsis, & internal quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).