There’s A Difference Between A Waiver Of The Statute Of Limitations And A Tolling Agreement.

A producer of a television series entered into a contract for the services of an actor. On May 16, 2002, the lawyer for the actor sent a letter to the lawyer for the production company:  “This letter will confirm our conversation on Wednesday, May 15th in which you courteously agreed that Don Johnson’s time in which to bring any action relating to the series ‘Nash Bridges’ against Rysher Entertainment will be tolled from, at least, our conversation on Tuesday, May 14th until and unless you give us reasonable notice (30 days) rescinding this tolling agreement. . . .”  The actor filed his complaint on February 17, 2009.  The production company argued that pursuant to CCP §360.5 the complaint is barred by the statute of limitations.  CCP §360.5 requires that a waiver of the statute of limitations must be in writing, signed by the person obligated and is ineffective for any period exceeding four years, unless renewed.  The Court of Appeal held the contention that §360.5, with its four-year renewal requirement, without merit because “the present case does not involve a waiver of the right to assert the statute of limitations.  Rather, the parties entered into a tolling agreement.” Don Johnson Productions, Inc. v. Rysher Entertainment, et al.  (Cal. App. Second Dist., Div. 5  October 1, 2012) (As Mod., October 9, 2012) 209 Cal.App.4th 919.