Mickey Fowler, et al. v. Tracy Guerin, et al.

Seattle, Washington civil litigation lawyers represented Plaintiffs, who sued defendants on a class action basis claiming that property or rights owned by them were taken in violation of the Fifth Amendment.



This certified question asks us to clarify the standards for

equitable tolling in civil cases under Washington law. The underlying federal case

involves a long-running dispute between a certified class of more than 25,000

Washington teachers (Teachers) and the Department of Retirement Systems (DRS).

The federal district court determined that while the Teachers have established a Fifth

Amendment takings claim, the applicable statute of limitations on that claim lapsed

several years before the Teachers filed this suit. The Teachers have asked the federal

district court to apply the doctrine of equitable tolling to allow the suit to proceed despite

the statute of limitations. Finding Washington law unclear, the federal district court

seeks clarification from this court as to the minimum predicates a plaintiff in a civil

action must establish to justify equitable tolling of the applicable statute of limitations.

We answer the certified question by reiterating the four conditions this court has

previously identified as necessary to justify equitable tolling of a statute of limitations

in the civil context. Washington law allows equitable tolling of a statute of limitations

in a civil suit when (1) the plaintiff has exercised diligence, (2) the defendant's bad

faith, false assurances, or deception has interfered with the plaintiff's diligent efforts,

(3) tolling is consistent with (a) the purpose of the underlying statute and (b) the purpose

of the statute of limitations, and (4) justice requires tolling the statute of limitations. See

Millay v. Cam, 135 Wn.2d 193, 206, 955 P.2d 791 (1998) (citing Finkelstein v. Sec.

Props., Inc., 76 Wn. App. 733, 739-40, 888 P.2d 161 (1995); Douchette v. Bethel

Sch. Dist. No. 403, 117 Wn.2d 805, 812, 818 P.2d 1362 (1991)).



See: https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/1000693.pdf

This standard appropriately balances the plaintiff’s interest in seeking justice

against the individual and societal interest in finality and the protection of defendants

against unfair surprise and stale claims. We reiterate that equitable tolling of statutes

of limitations in civil cases is appropriate only where these principles align. Any lesser

standard “would substitute for a positive rule established by the legislature a variable

rule of decision based upon individual ideas of justice.” Leschner, 27 Wn.2d at 926