California limitation period: action on a written contract
needs research· statutory · US-CA · ca.limitations.written_contract v1 · file sha256 e37c78db311e…
This rule is not verified. Its text, elements and any period parameters are research placeholders written for human review. Findings based on it are capped at Plausible/Weak and documents cannot cite it as verified authority.
Rationale
Seed rule. The 4-year figure is a placeholder pending verification from the primary text.
Authorities
- Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 337 primary statute — Limitation period for actions on written contracts · source
- Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 360 limitation statute — Effect of acknowledgment or promise in writing; payment · source
- Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 361 limitation statute — Borrowing statute: actions barred where the cause of action arose · source
- Cal. Com. Code § 2725 contrary statute — Limitation period for contracts for sale of goods · source
Links open public legal sources in your browser; this application itself never fetches them.
Primary-source snapshots
None on file. Import one with cda rules import-source.
Verification record
No human verification record.
Applies to
Account types: any · Circumstances: none required
Required elements
| Element | Fact tested | Test | Quote anchor |
|---|---|---|---|
| The underlying obligation is a written contract (not a sale-of-goods contract, oral agreement, or other claim type) | account.claim_type | eq written_contract | no anchor yet |
| The accrual date (e.g. the breach/first missed payment under the contract's terms) is known | account.accrual_date | known | no anchor yet |
| California law governs (residence/choice-of-law established) | jurisdiction.determined | known | no anchor yet |
Exceptions / limitations
- revival_by_acknowledgment_or_payment (note, needs research) — A written acknowledgment or a payment may affect the period; the exact effect must be verified.
- tolling (note, needs research) — Absence from the state or other tolling facts may apply.
- borrowing_statute (note, needs research) — If the cause of action arose in another state, the borrowing statute may import that state's bar.
Calculation
method limitations_from_accrual · params {'trigger_fact': 'account.accrual_date', 'years': 4} · parameters are part of the rule and inherit its verification status.
Contrary considerations
- The accrual date is not the date of first delinquency reported to bureaus and not the date of last activity; it must be established from the contract and payment history.
- Credit-card and sale-of-goods obligations may fall under different periods (see ca.limitations.sale_of_goods); claim type is a fact to establish, not assume.
- Expiry of a limitation period does not require deletion from a credit report and may not extinguish the debt; it may be a defense to a lawsuit.
Potential outcomes (not predictions)
limitations_estimate
Routes this rule can suggest
- Review the limitation period before any payment or acknowledgment — Establish claim type, accrual date, governing law and any tolling/revival facts before deciding on contact.
- Consult legal aid or an attorney — Where a rule is unverified or the facts suggest a potential claim, a consultation can confirm the analysis.