California Statute of Limitations: Deadlines by Case Type

California's statute of limitations rules establish hard filing deadlines that extinguish legal claims if not honored — regardless of the underlying merits of a case. These deadlines vary significantly by case type, ranging from 6 months for certain government tort claims to 10 years for judgments and written obligations. Understanding the classification structure across civil, criminal, and administrative proceedings is essential for anyone navigating California's court system or evaluating a potential claim.

Definition and scope

A statute of limitations is a legislatively enacted time boundary within which a legal action must be filed. Once the deadline expires, the right to sue or prosecute is generally barred, and courts will dismiss the claim on that basis. In California, these deadlines are codified primarily in the California Code of Civil Procedure (CCP), Part 2, Title 2 (§§ 312–366.3), and in the California Penal Code for criminal matters.

The California Legislature sets these periods by statute, and the California Judicial Council provides procedural rules governing how courts handle limitations defenses. Statutes of limitations are distinct from statutes of repose (which run from a triggering event, not the plaintiff's discovery of harm) and from jurisdictional deadlines imposed by administrative agencies. The broader regulatory and jurisdictional context is addressed at Regulatory Context for the California Legal System.

Scope coverage: This page addresses California state law limitations periods as codified in state statutes. Federal civil rights claims filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in California borrow the state's 2-year personal injury period but are governed by federal accrual rules — a distinction that falls outside pure state-law analysis. Claims arising exclusively under federal statutes (ERISA, Title VII, patent law) are not covered here. Tribal court jurisdictions and matters governed solely by federal agency regulations are also outside the scope of this reference.

How it works

The limitations period begins to run when a cause of action "accrues." Under California's discovery rule, accrual is generally delayed until the plaintiff knew — or reasonably should have known — of the facts giving rise to the claim (CCP § 351 et seq.). This distinction between the act date and the discovery date is a recurring source of litigation.

Several mechanisms can pause ("toll") or extend the clock:

1. Minority tolling — The period is tolled while a plaintiff is under 18 years old (CCP § 352).
2. Mental incapacity — Tolled during legal incapacity (CCP § 352).
3. Defendant's absence from California — The period may be tolled when the defendant is outside the state (CCP § 351).
4. Government Tort Claims Act — Claims against California public entities require a government tort claim to be filed within 6 months of injury under the California Government Code § 911.2, before a lawsuit can proceed.
5. Fraud and concealment — Equitable tolling applies when a defendant actively conceals the cause of action.
6. Contractual agreement — Parties may sometimes shorten or extend limitations periods by contract, subject to statutory limits.

The California civil procedure framework provides the procedural mechanism for raising a limitations defense — typically through a demurrer, motion for summary judgment, or affirmative defense in the answer.

Common scenarios

California's most frequently litigated limitations periods by case type are:

Criminal matters operate under separate statutes within the California Penal Code. Felonies carrying a potential life sentence carry no limitations period under Penal Code § 799. Most other felonies carry a 3-year period under Penal Code § 801, while misdemeanors carry a 1-year period under Penal Code § 802.

Child sexual abuse claims illustrate how California has progressively extended deadlines: under CCP § 340.1, victims may file until age 40 or within 5 years of discovering a psychological injury linked to the abuse, whichever is later.

Decision boundaries

The critical classification boundaries that determine which limitations period applies involve distinguishing:

• Tort vs. contract: A breach of contract claim (4 years for written contracts) and a fraud claim (3 years) arising from the same transaction may accrue differently and carry different deadlines.
• Written vs. oral contract: The 4-year/2-year distinction at CCP §§ 337–339 turns on whether the agreement is memorialized in writing signed by the party to be charged.
• Government defendant vs. private defendant: Claims against California public entities require compliance with the Government Claims Act (Government Code § 900 et seq.) before a civil suit can proceed — a prerequisite that functions independently of the underlying limitations period.
• Discovery rule availability: Not all claims benefit equally from delayed accrual. Fraud and latent injury claims are well-established discovery-rule categories; property damage claims generally accrue at the time of damage.
• Federal vs. state court: Claims filed in federal court sitting in California may apply California's limitations period but use federal accrual and tolling doctrine, as addressed in the California vs. Federal Law Conflicts reference.

The full structure of California's court system, including which court has jurisdiction over claims at various dollar thresholds and subject-matter categories, is documented in the California Legal Authority index.

References

• California Code of Civil Procedure, Part 2, Title 2 (§§ 312–366.3) — California Legislature
• California Government Code § 900 et seq. (Government Claims Act) — California Legislature
• California Penal Code §§ 799–805 (Criminal Limitations) — California Legislature
• California Welfare and Institutions Code § 15657.7 (Elder Abuse) — California Legislature
• California Judicial Council — Policy and Rulemaking
• CCP § 340.1 (Childhood Sexual Abuse) — California Legislature