1

Statute Limitations

Name

Institution Affiliation

Professor

Course

Due Date
 2

Statute Limitations

A statute of limitations is a legislation that specifies how much time has passed since a

civil or criminal crime occurred before legal action must be taken. The statute of limitations, or

the amount of time a victim has to file a lawsuit against a defendant in a criminal case, might

differ by jurisdiction and type of crime. Supporters of statutes of limitations argue that they are

necessary because, with the passage of time, crucial evidence can be destroyed and witnesses'

memories can become obscure (Lafontaine, 2005). The facts of the case scenario show that the

statute of limitations for defamation had expired by the time Jon LeFrantis brought suit against

the plaint (Notta). But, Notta Sorluzer that right because they waited too long after making their

social media comments to file a lawsuit. In other words, the plaintiff would be permanently

barred from pursuing a lawsuit for damages of any kind.

A case law that aligns to the statute of limitation involved the United States v. Lovasco,

431 U.S. 783 (1977). Some federal offenses were alleged to have been committed by the

defendant more than 18 months prior to the indictment being filed (LexisNexis, 2023).

Defendant filed a motion to dismiss the indictment for unreasonable delay in the United States

District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, arguing that the loss of two key witnesses was

a direct result of the prolonged legal proceedings. After a month had passed since the alleged

commission of the crime, the government had all the information pertaining to the defendant's

purported commission of the offense, and the District Court ruled that the 17-month delay until

bringing charges had not been explained or justified, and therefore was unnecessary and

unreasonable. (LexisNexis, 2023). Despite agreeing with the government that the delay was

necessary to preserve the investigation, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

nonetheless affirmed the lower court's decision.

 3

Some federal offenses were alleged to have been committed by the defendant more than

18 months prior to the indictment being filed. Defendant filed a motion to dismiss the indictment

for unreasonable delay in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri,

arguing that the loss of two key witnesses was a direct result of the prolonged legal proceedings

(LoPucki, 2018). After a month had passed since the alleged commission of the crime, the

government had all the information pertaining to the defendant's purported commission of the

offense, and the District Court ruled that the 17-month delay until bringing charges had not been

described or justified, and therefore was unnecessary and unreasonable (LoPucki, 2018). Despite

agreeing with the government that the delay was necessary to preserve the investigation, the

United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit nonetheless affirmed the lower court's

decision.

In some cases, a claim can be filed even after the statute of limitations has passed. When

a defendant or plaintiff becomes aware that they have been harmed, only then does the statute of

limitations begin to run. This seemingly trivial distinction has far-reaching consequences in

several contexts. The statute of limitations for many offenses is only two or three years

(Lafontaine, 2005). In addition, if a person is physically absent from the state or is facing

criminal charges, the statute of limitations may be temporarily extended (LoPucki, 2018). A

suspect should first consult with an experienced criminal defense attorney before making any

assumptions about whether or not they need to appear in court. The statute of limitations can be

amended, particularly when the factor of relevance is at play. Tolling or other legal regulations

may affect how much time has actually passed since the claimed violation was committed

(LoPucki, 2018). In the case of Jon LeFrantis vs. Notta Sorluzer, for example, it is clear that the
 4

defendant's argument that a comment I made on my MySpace violated the statute of limitation is

without merit.

Although the defendant's case facts fit the statute of limitation, the subsequent comment

on MySpace- "I have always been a tremendous success."- casts doubt on the validity of the

case. Statements like "You ae a tremendous failure and plain awful..." are irrelevant. In order to

ensure that the judge and jury base their findings solely on the law, there are constraints on the

kind of evidence that can be presented in court. Character evidence is particularly vulnerable to

bias since it focuses on a person's traits rather than the sequence of events that must be shown by

the parties. Nonetheless, evidence of one's character can be useful, especially when countering

other evidence. The ultimate decision on whether or not to admit evidence rests with the court,

which frequently bases its decision on concerns about unfair bias.

 5

References

Lafontaine, F. (2005). No amnesty or statute of limitation for enforced disappearances: The

Sandoval Case before the Supreme Court of Chile. J. Int'l Crim. Just., 3, 469.

LoPucki, L. M. (2018). Statute of Limitations in Warranty. U. Fla. L. Rev., 21, 336.

LexisNexis (2023). United States v. Lovasco - 431 U.S. 783, 97 S. Ct. 2044 (1977). Online.

Retrieved from

https://www.lexisnexis.com/community/casebrief/p/casebrief-united-states-v-lovasco