About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

1 1 (January 9, 2020)

handle is hein.crs/govbiwz0001 and id is 1 raw text is: Resarh Servi k-M- When Does the Clock Start Ticking? Considerations When Drafting Statutes of Limitations January 9, 2020 Many federal laws contain statutes of limitations that bar plaintiffs from filing civil lawsuits after a specified time period. 15 U.S.C. § 15b, for example, provides that certain civil antitrust lawsuits shall be forever barred unless commenced within four years after the cause of action accrued. These statutes of limitations serve several purposes. For one, time bars mitigate challenges associated with stale evidence. With passing years, memories of an event may fade, physical evidence may deteriorate, and critical witnesses may die or become difficult to locate. Encouraging plaintiffs to file lawsuits promptly can thus help ensure that judges and juries decide cases based on complete and accurate evidence. Statutes of limitations also afford prospective defendants legal peace by relieving them of the threat of liability after a specified time period. However, statutes of limitations necessarily foreclose injured plaintiffs from maintaining otherwise meritorious lawsuits and may therefore allow defendants to escape liability. As the Supreme Court's recent decision in Rotkiske v. Klemn reflects, Congress's choices regarding how to balance these competing interests can have significant practical consequences. The way Congress drafts a statute of limitations affects how courts interpret that provision, which, in turn, affects when judges dismiss cases as time-barred. Some commentators even predict that Rotkiske-which arose out of a dispute over the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA)-may have wide-ranging implications beyond the specific statute at issue in that case. Using Rotkiske as an illustrative example, this Sidebar explores issues Congress may consider when enacting a statute of limitations. Rotkiske v. Klemm In Rotkiske, a debt collector sued a consumer in 2009 to collect an unpaid credit card debt. Because the debt collector allegedly served the lawsuit on the wrong person, the consumer was unaware of the lawsuit, and the debt collector obtained a default judgment against him. The consumer claimed he did not discover that adverse judgment until 2014. Once he finally learned about the 2009 case, the consumer filed his own lawsuit against the debt collector in 2015. The consumer specifically claimed that the debt collector violated the FDCPA by filing the 2009 lawsuit after the applicable statute of limitations governing debt collection actions had expired. Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov LSB10390 CRS Lega Sidebar Prepaed for Membeivs and Cornm ittees o4 Cor~qress ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most