Lukovsky v. City and County of San Francisco

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that “[i]f defendant had told plaintiff that it would not plead the statute of limitations as a defense to any suit . . . this would be a case for equitable estoppel”
• noting that the requirements under California law are the same
• discussing the “discovery rule” as it applies to equitable tolling of the statute of limitations period until plaintiff discovers the actual injury
• “[E]quitable estoppel doctrine requires showing of fraudulent concealment or conduct above and beyond the wrongdoing upon which the plaintiff’s claim is filed, to prevent the plaintiff from suing in time.” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)
• setting forth elements of California’s doctrine of equitable estoppel
• discussing equitable tolling and estoppel

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).