Dimcheff

MEMORANDUM **

Ivan Dimcheff appeals the district court’s dismissal of his first amended complaint without leave to amend. The district court held that DimchefPs claims were barred by the applicable statutes of limitations and that Dimcheff was not entitled to equitable tolling under Bollinger v. Nat’l Fire Ins. Co., 25 Cal.2d 399 , 154 P.2d 399 (1944), or the general doctrine of equitable tolling.

Dimcheff argues that the district court erred because his complaint pleads facts sufficient to support equitable tolling under Bollinger . We disagree.

Technically, Bollinger does not concern equitable tolling, but, rather, an equitable application of California’s saving statute, found at California Code of Civil Procedure section 355. In Bollinger , the defendant brought a motion for nonsuit which was erroneously granted. By this time, the limitations period had already expired due to numerous continuances and extensions of time obtained by the defendant. The plaintiff attempted to refile his claims in a second action, but the court dismissed the action on timeliness grounds.

The California Supreme Court held that equitable considerations justified relieving the plaintiff from the…