It may also take the form of equitable tolling, where the court applies common law principles of equity to extend the time for the filing of a document.
Importantly, it has also been held that the equitable tolling doctrine does not require wrongful conduct on the part of the defendant, such as fraud or misrepresentation.
Also, where relevant facts of a cause of action for fraud or mistake have been hidden from a claimant, the limitation period will commence on the date that the person could have with reasonable diligence discovered it.
[16] Equitable tolling does not require active deception or employer misconduct, but focuses rather on whether the plaintiff acted with a reasonably prudent regard for his rights.
[17] Maryland's courts have held that the statute of limitations reflects a legislative judgment of what is deemed an adequate period of time in which a person of ordinary diligence” should bring his or her legal action.
[20] The Supreme Court of New Mexico has held that equitable tolling normally applies in cases where a litigant was prevented from filing suit because of an extraordinary event beyond his or her control.
[21] In contrast, where a plaintiff fails to identify a cause of action and file a lawsuit in a timely manner due to his or her own fault, equitable tolling does not apply.
For the American broadcasting licensing authority, the Federal Communications Commission, the term tolling is used to describe an allowed delay in the activation of broadcast facilities past the expiration date of a construction permit, due to factors such as the inability to build them out due to a lack of available contractors and engineers, financial hardship for the licensee, or natural disasters and other acts of God.