Filing Deadlines Californians Sleep On: A Q1 Review of the Statutes of Limitation That Bite

Through the first quarter of 2026, the deadline questions people brought to their attorney searches had a common shape: not "what is the statute of limitations?" but "wait — it can be that short?" The answer, in California, is yes. The limitation periods that end cases early are rarely the famous ones; they are the six-month, one-year, and discovery-triggered clocks running quietly underneath a claim everyone assumed had years left. This is a tour of the deadlines that actually bite, statute by statute.

The default people round up: two years

Most claims for injury to a person — collisions, falls, dog bites, wrongful death — carry a two-year period under Code of Civil Procedure § 335.1, generally running from the date of injury. Two years sounds generous until it is spent on medical treatment and insurance negotiations, neither of which stops the clock. The full map of injury deadlines, including how property-damage claims from the same crash run on a different schedule, is in our personal-injury deadline brief.

The six-month trap: claims against the government

The deadline that surprised people most in early 2026 is also the oldest trap in the book. When the responsible party is a public entity — a city, county, school district, transit agency, or the state — the Government Claims Act requires a written claim for injury to person or personal property to be presented to the entity within six months of accrual under Government Code § 911.2. A lawsuit filed without that step is generally not saved by the two-year statute.

Two companion provisions complete the trap:

• Missed the six months? A written application for leave to present a late claim may be made under Government Code § 911.4 — but it must come within a reasonable time, not to exceed one year from accrual, and relief is not automatic.
• Claim rejected? Government Code § 945.6 then gives a short window to sue — generally six months from the written rejection notice (a longer period applies only if proper written notice was never given).

The pattern to internalize: the moment a public entity might be involved, every other deadline in this brief becomes secondary.

Medical malpractice: two clocks, first one wins

Professional negligence claims against health care providers run under Code of Civil Procedure § 340.5: three years from the date of injury, or one year from the date the plaintiff discovers — or reasonably should have discovered — the injury, whichever comes first. In practice, the one-year discovery clock controls far more often than the three-year one, and "should have discovered" is judged objectively. Minors and cases involving fraud, concealment, or a retained foreign object follow their own rules within the same section.

The one-year statutes that surprise

Two claims people routinely assume carry years actually carry one:

• Defamation. Libel and slander claims must be brought within one year under Code of Civil Procedure § 340.
• Legal malpractice. Claims against attorneys run under Code of Civil Procedure § 340.6: one year from actual or constructive discovery, with a four-year outer limit, subject to the tolling grounds listed in the statute itself (including continued representation on the same matter).

The three-year family — and the four-year contract

Code of Civil Procedure § 338 collects a set of three-year claims that come up constantly: damage to real or personal property, liability created by statute (the basis for many wage claims), and fraud — with the important wrinkle that a fraud claim is not deemed to accrue until the aggrieved party discovers the facts constituting it. Contract claims split by formality: four years for breach of a written contract under § 337, but only two years for an oral one under § 339. Claims under the Unfair Competition Law carry their own four-year period under Business and Professions Code § 17208.

Tolling: real, narrow, and not a plan

California law does pause limitation periods in defined circumstances. Under Code of Civil Procedure § 352, the clock is generally tolled while the plaintiff is a minor or lacks legal capacity — though government claims and medical malpractice follow their own, less forgiving timing rules. Section 351 can toll the period while a defendant is absent from the state. Courts also apply a delayed-discovery rule in limited situations where an injury or its cause was not reasonably knowable. Every one of these doctrines is fact-intensive, and none of them is a substitute for filing on the shortest plausible deadline.

The Q1 scorecard

The habit the first quarter of 2026 kept teaching: fix the accrual date, list every deadline that could apply, and treat the earliest as the real one. Deadline questions are exactly what an early consultation is for — and verifying a California attorney's license takes about two minutes before the first call.