Does Budget Rent-A-Car have a role in determining the statute of limitations in an unfair settlement action?

Moreover, once the elements of an estoppel have been sufficiently pleaded, whether the statute of limitations is tolled by the conduct of the defendant is a question to be decided by the trier of fact. (Muraoka v. Budget Rent-A-Car, Inc., supra, 160 Cal.App.3d 107, 117, 206 Cal.Rptr. 476.) Budget's conduct would, therefore, be relevant on the issue of estoppel at trial in Muraoka. ² Here, since Moores specifically waived the statute of limitations defense in his [188 Cal.App.3d 1251] answer (a matter judicially noticeable by the trial court and by this court (Evid.Code, 452, subd. (d)), evidence of the other defendants' unfair settlement practices is irrelevant to plaintiff's cause of action against Moores, would be prejudicial to defendant Moores, and might well constitute reversible error. (See Neumann v. Bishop (1976) 59 Cal.App.3d 451, 469, 130 Cal.Rptr. 786.)