Legal Question in Business Law in California

If the defendant/judgment debtor were out of state, the statute of limitations would probably be tolled. However, there are two statutes affecting your right to collect - Code of Civil Procedure 337.5(b) and CCP 683.020, and there is an unpublished case which holds, correctly I believe, that the 10-year limits of the latter is absolute in all cases. See Gartnell Construction v. Johnson (2003) which reads in part:

" The Enforcement of Judgments Law (§ 680.010) prescribes a 10-year limitation period for enforcement of a judgment. Except as otherwise provided by statute, 10 years after the date of entry of a money judgment any enforcement procedures must cease, and any lien pursuant to the judgment is extinguished. (& sect; 683.020.) A judgment may be renewed by application (§ 683.110 et seq.) or by a timely action on the judgment. (§ 683.050.)2

" As the Law Revision Commission Comment to section 683.050 explains, "the 10-year period of enforcement prescribed by Section 683.020 and the renewal procedure provided by Article 2 (commencing with Section 683.110) do not affect the right to bring an action on a judgment. The limitation period for commencing the action is prescribed by Section 337.5. The 10-year period provided by Section 683.020 and the 10-year statute of limitations provided by Section 337.5 are not coterminous. The period prescribed in Section 683.020 commences on the date of entry and is not tolled for any reason. The statute of limitations commences to run when the judgment is final (see Turner v. Donovan [(1942)] 52 Cal.App.2d 236) and may be tolled such as by the debtor's absence from the state (see Section 351)." (Cal. Law Revision Com. com., foll. § 683.050, italics added; see Bonanno v. Central Contra Costa Transit Authority (2003) 30 Cal.4th 139 [official comments of California Law Revision Commission persuasive evidence of intent of draftors and legislators]; see also Iliff v. Dustrud (2003) 107 Cal.App.4th 1201, 1208-1209.)"