Huryn

Huryn v. Paiz CA2/8

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 3, 2013B240758California1,389 words

Opinion

Opinion

Rubin, J.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On Monday, February 14, 2011, Natalia A. Huryn filed a complaint against Salvador Paiz, alleging that she was injured when Paiz drove his truck into her as she crossed the street on February 10, 2009. Huryn’s complaint included three causes of action: (1) battery; (2) negligence; and (3) unlawful business practices (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 17200) because Paiz was driving for business purposes when the incident occurred. Although the statute of limitations for unfair competition claims is four years (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 17208), claims for battery and negligence must be brought within two years (Code Civ. Proc., § 335.1). In order to address the fact that Huryn’s complaint was filed after February 10, 2011, when the limitations period on her two tort claims would have ordinarily expired, her complaint alleged that her attorney had had settlement discussions with Paiz’s insurer on February 7, 2011, and that the insurer agreed to extend the limitations period until Friday, February 11, 2011, to give the parties time to settle the case. Huryn alleged that because she relied on the statements made by Paiz’s insurer, and because no settlement had been reached,…

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.