What Does A Tolling Agreement Mean

Under the toll agreement, counsel for the applicant should have a firm understanding of all prescription issues. Information gathered informally during negotiations should not be subject to costly requests for investigation. (2) Commercial considerations among co-accused may have an impact on decisions on toll agreements. Prior to 2015, when the United States was a defendant, a fair toll could not be applied against the United States, as the spending clause was interpreted by the Supreme Court to only give Congress the power to waive sovereign immunity, and statutes of limitations are interpreted as a condition for the lifting of sovereign immunity limiting a court`s jurisdiction to rule on cases against the United States. In April 2015, the Supreme Court ruled that, despite the spending clause, a fair toll applies in the United States. [9] Some non-federal courts in the United States have different approaches to fair tolls, with some courts accepting a fair toll and others severely restricting the practice or issuing the statute of limitations if there is no legal authority to impose the statute of limitations. In exchange for the plaintiff delaying the filing of an appeal until the expiry of the toll agreement, the defendant agrees to waive the right to use that time to calculate the expiry period of the claim. With the statute of limitations suspended, the parties may have the necessary time to negotiate and resolve the dispute. Co-accused should consider toll agreements if they wish for additional time to consider filing counter-claims against each other. Under the laws of some states, counter-claims must be filed while proceedings are pending, requiring defendants to decide, before trial, whether to assert counter-claims.

In some cases, this decision could be imposed on a defendant before it is clear whether the applicant has a significant liability case. When counter-claims are invoked, the defendants may focus too much on the transfer of responsibility between them and involuntarily assist the plaintiff in determining liability or increasing the value of the case by developing facts that have been overlooked by the applicant.