Opinion ID: 2604155
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: general/special time limitations dichotomy

Text: Section 100, which operates generally to extend statutory limitations, is remedial in nature. It serves to lengthen only the period allowed for the commencement of an action or proceeding [8]  whether the action or proceeding be one at law, in equity or one that is grounded on statute. [9] It does not enlarge the time to challenge judicial action. Section 100 has no application to an attack upon a judicial decision. The commencement of a proceeding to vacate, to modify or to reopen a judgment or decree is governed by special time limits not affected by general limitations of actions. Among the familiar statutes that regulate the time for challenging judicial action or judgment are: [1] 12 O.S. 1981 § 1038 which governs time limits for vacation or modification of judgments; [10] [2] 12 O.S. 1981 § 176 which deals with the time limit to reopen a judgment; [11] [3] 12 O.S. 1981 § 700 which regulates the time to show cause against a judgment rendered during a person's minority; [12] [4] 12 O.S. 1981 § 655 which deals with time limits for a new trial as a result of (a) an impossibility to prepare the appellate record or (b) newly discovered evidence; [13] [5] 51 O.S.Supp. 1986 § 156 which provides time limits for the accrual of a cause of action in favor of a minor under The Governmental Tort Claims Act [14] and [6] 58 O.S. 1981 § 67 which controls time limits for a post-probate will contest. [15] All of these special time limits attach directly to the right created. They constitute conditions precedent to the pursuit of the affordable relief rather than a limitation on the time to commence an action. [16] Our case law requires that a challenge made under the cited statutes be brought within the time prescribed for its institution by the authorizing enactment. [17] Another principle of law may be invoked to reinforce the result we reach today. Where, as here, there are two statutory provisions  one of which is general and the other special because it clearly includes the matter in controversy and prescribes different rules and procedures from those in a general provision  the special, and not the general statute, must be applied. [18] Section 67 is a special statute regulating the time to challenge a will's prior admission to probate.