Jennifer Fry’s counsel dated February 8, 2007, wherein he informs Plaintiffs of Defendant Shifrin’s alleged role in the conduct at issue. Id. at Exhibit O [Docket No. 80-16]. Although there is legal precedent to support Plaintiffs’ assertion that the RESPA statute of limitations can be equitably tolled, the Tenth Circuit has noted that application of the doctrine is limited to “rare and exceptional circumstances.” Garcia v. Shanks, 351 F.3d 468, 473 n. 2 (10th Cir.2003). Specifically, equitable tolling is only available where a plaintiff “diligently pursues his claims and demonstrates that the failure to timely file was caused by extraordinary circumstances beyond his control.” Id.; see also Irwin v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, 498 U.S. 89, 96, 111 S.Ct. 453, 112 L.Ed.2d 435 (1990) (<HOLDING>). Plaintiffs do not allege that fraudulent
recognizing that equitable tolling doctrines may toll the time period for filing recognizing appropriateness of tolling where the complainant has been induced or tricked by his adversarys misconduct into allowing the filing deadline to pass holding that equitable tolling of a statute of limitations may be triggered 1 where a plaintiff has actively pursued his judicial remedies by a filing a defective pleading during the statutory period or 2 where a plaintiff was induced or tricked by his adversarys misconduct into allowing the filing deadline to pass holding that equitable tolling is allowed where the complainant had been induced or tricked by his adversarys misconduct into allowing the filing deadline to pass holding that in this context the filing deadline is tantamount to a statute of limitations