A conflict of interest that allegedly prevented a lawsuit from being brought does not “equitably toll” a statute of limitations, Virginia’s Supreme Court says in Birchwood-Manassas Associates LLC v. Birchwood at Oak Knoll Farm, LLC (6/4/15). The plaintiff argued that the conflict was an “extraordinary circumstance”, which the Supreme Court has said can justify equitable tolling. (Brunswick Land Corp. v. Perkinson, 153 Va. 603, 608, 151 S.E. 138, 140 (1930)). Earlier cases of equitable tolling were suits that had been prevented from timely filing by fraud, or by some affirmative act of the Defendant. But neither of those was alleged in this case. And “Affiliated entities having overlapping management and the occurrence of transactions between such entities are not extraordinary occurrences.” Also, there were other parties available who could have sued on the claims before the statute expired, and one of them did in fact sue on a similar claim. There was no legal disability which “as a matter of law” kept a suit from being filed, and no “extraordinary circumstance which could not have been avoided by the exercise of due diligence.” So the clear rule seems to be that a conflict of interest does not toll the statute, but the additional circumstances the Court cites might lead to a different result in a case where they are different.