Within five years:
§ 336.Mesne Profits; Violation of Restriction As Defined In Section 784, Civil Code
Title 2. Of the Time of Commencing Civil Actions · Chapter 3. The Time of Commencing Actions Other Than for the Recovery of Real Property · Last amended 1999 · Last verified July 28, 2026
In one sentenceSection 336 sets a five-year deadline for actions recovering mesne profits from real property and for actions to enforce a recorded use restriction, with the restriction claim running from discovery of the violation rather than the violation itself.
Full Text of § 336
(a) An action for mesne profits of real property.
(b) An action for violation of a restriction, as defined in Section 784 of the Civil Code. The period prescribed in this subdivision runs from the time the person seeking to enforce the restriction discovered or, through the exercise of reasonable diligence, should have discovered the violation. A failure to commence an action for violation of a restriction within the period prescribed in this subdivision does not waive the right to commence an action for any other violation of the restriction and does not, in itself, create an implication that the restriction is abandoned, obsolete, or otherwise unenforceable. This subdivision shall not bar commencement of an action for violation of a restriction before January 1, 2001, and until January 1, 2001, any other applicable statutory or common law limitation shall continue to apply to that action.
Plain-English Summary
Section 336 covers two distinct claims under one five-year umbrella. The first, mesne profits, is an old real-property concept: profits a wrongful possessor of land collected while occupying it between two points in time, recoverable by whoever is later found to hold rightful title.
The second, added in 1998, targets violations of a recorded use restriction as defined in Civil Code § 784 — the kind of covenant that limits how a parcel can be used. Unlike the mesne-profits claim, this one runs on a discovery rule: the five years starts when the person entitled to enforce the restriction discovered, or reasonably should have discovered, the violation, not when the violation began. Missing that five-year window on one violation doesn’t forgive a later, separate violation, and it doesn’t by itself suggest the restriction has been abandoned or is unenforceable.
The restriction-enforcement rule only applies going forward from January 1, 2001; before that date, whatever limitations rule already governed the claim kept applying.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the deadline to sue over a violated use restriction on real property?
Five years under § 336, running from when the person entitled to enforce the restriction discovered, or should have discovered, the violation — not from when the violation happened.
Does missing the five-year deadline on one violation waive the restriction entirely?
No. Section 336 says failing to sue within the period for one violation neither waives the right to sue over a different violation nor implies the restriction has become unenforceable.
Amendment History
Amended by Stats. 1998, Ch. 14, Sec. 3. Effective January 1, 1999.
Source & verification. Section text is reproduced verbatim from
the Deering's California Codes Annotated / vLex. Enacted by the California Legislature.
Last verified July 28, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as: mesne profits statute of limitations Californiadeed restriction violation statute of limitations California