MacHules v. Department of Admin.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that equitable tolling applies “when the plaintiff has been misled or lulled into inaction”
• finding that opposing party was not prejudiced by petition that was filed one day late when opposing party “obviously was on notice that petitioner intended to appeal”
• explaining that “[t]he doctrine of equitable tolling was developed to permit under certain circumstances the filing of a lawsuit that otherwise would be barred by a limitations period”
• holding equitable tolling may expand time
• stating the doctrine of equitable tolling, unlike equitable estoppel, does not require deception or misrepresentation by the defendant; rather, it serves to ameliorate the harsh results that sometimes flow from a strict, literalistic application of administrative time limits
• doctrine of equitable tolling is generally applied in cases where defendant’s representations lulled plaintiff into inaction

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).