What is the effect of the waiver rule on a cross-action?

The rule is usually stated in terms of the statute of limitations being "tolled" or "suspended" by the filing of the complaint. In explaining why the rule does not apply to a cross-action against a new party or a codefendant other than the plaintiff, several Court of Appeal decisions have stated, " 'The principle underlying the rule that a statute of limitations is suspended by the filing of the original complaint is that the plaintiff has thereby waived the claim and permitted the defendant to make all proper defenses to the cause of action pleaded. But, where the controversy is limited to cross-defendants, none of whom has done any act in the nature of a waiver the reason for the rule does not exist.' " (Trindade v. Superior Court (1973) 29 Cal.App.3d 857, 859-860, 106 Cal.Rptr. 48.) Similarly, when respondents here filed the Los Angeles complaint, they waived the statute of limitations as to all proper defenses to that particular cause of action. However, as appellant never [232 Cal.App.3d 1028] asserted any defense or cross-complaint in that action, the purpose for the waiver rule never matured, and the suspension never came into play.