Deutch

Deutch v. Hoffman

Good Law
165 Cal. App. 3d 152·1985 Cal. App. LEXIS 1704·211 Cal. Rptr. 319
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 1, 1985B008103California1,234 words

Opinion

Opinion

Gates, J.

Plaintiff Stuart Deutch appeals from the judgment that dismissed his complaint against his sister, defendant Muriel Hoffman, on the ground it was barred by the applicable statute of limitations.

At trial, both parties agreed that this bar existed unless a tolling had occurred in 1975. Appellant urged only that Code of Civil Procedure section 352, subdivision (a)3, which tolls limiting statutes if “at the time the cause of action accrued . . . [the injured party was] imprisoned on a criminal charge, or in execution under the sentence of a criminal court for a term less than for life . . .,” (italics added) should also be deemed applicable to individuals on parole. The court rejected this contention and granted defendant’s motion to dismiss.

Until January 1, 1976, former Penal Code section 2600 did suspend the civil rights of persons sentenced to prison but it was, at least on its face, made applicable to such persons only “during [their] imprisonment.” If it was also intended to apply with equal severity to all the civil rights of a parolee, it did not expressly so provide.

Statutes relating to civil death or the suspension of civil rights are penal in nature and are to…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.