- 37 -
integral part of the statutory right conferred. Id. at 516-517.
Although the marshal argued that, on grounds of public policy, the
sovereign ought not be subject to restrictions binding on private
suitors, the Supreme Court saw no valid reason for making such an
exception:
The time limit for issuing executions is, strictly
speaking, not a statute of limitations. On the contrary,
the privilege of issuing an execution is merely to be
exercised within a specified time, as are other
procedural steps in the course of a litigation after it
is instituted. * * *
Id. at 519.
The Supreme Court has also recognized that the right of the
Government to be free from statutes of limitations does not mean
the Government can pursue a cause of action where none exists
under State law or otherwise. See United States v. California,
507 U.S. 746 (1993); Guaranty Trust Co. v. United States, supra.
C. The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
The Ninth Circuit has similarly recognized that the Summerlin
doctrine is inapplicable to State statutes that provide a time
limitation as an element of a cause of action. See United States
v. California, 655 F.2d 914 (9th Cir. 1980). In California, the
Ninth Circuit held that the claim filing requirements of
California Government Code section 911.2, which required that all
claims for money or damages for which the State is liable be
presented within 1 year of the date that the claim arose, was
applicable to the Federal Government. The Government was pursuing
Page: Previous 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011