Also known as: statute of limitations · statutes of limitations · statute of limitation · limitations period · limitation period · SOL · limitation act
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A statutory rule that bars commencement of a civil claim or criminal prosecution after a fixed period measured from accrual of the cause of action. The period prevents stale claims while still allowing a reasonable window for suit. Relation back, tolling, and revival rules may extend or shorten the period under specific statutes or doctrines.
Levi Lowe filed a complaint against Lakeshore Industries alleging breach of a supply contract. After the limitations period expired, he sought to amend the complaint to add a new defendant. Because the governing statute of limitations permitted relation back, the amendment was allowed and the new defendant remained subject to suit.
Layla Lane sued Lakewood Manufacturing in federal court under diversity jurisdiction for a state-law tort claim. The defendant moved to dismiss on timeliness grounds under state law. The court applied the state statute of limitations and its tolling rules because those rules are substantive for Erie purposes and would determine the outcome.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Logan Lane owed Lattice Systems on an overdue equipment lease. After the limitations period had run, Logan wrote to the company acknowledging the debt and promising to pay half. The acknowledgment revived the claim, allowing Lattice Systems to enforce the obligation despite the expired statute.
Leonard Lowe and Leah Lamb ended their cohabitation after five years. Leonard sued for breach of an oral agreement to share assets. The claim accrued on the date of breach and remained timely when filed within the contractual limitations period, whether during or after cohabitation.
Lena Lawson was charged with an offense whose limitations period had already expired. A new statute purported to revive the prosecution. The court dismissed the charge because the retroactive extension altered the legal consequences of past conduct in violation of the Ex Post Facto Clause.
Lighthouse Shipping sued in federal court on a contract claim that would have been time-barred under state law. The court held that applying a different federal rule on timeliness would produce a materially different result from the one a state court would reach, so the state statute of limitations controlled.
A federal court sitting in diversity must apply the state statute of limitations and its tolling rules because those rules are substantive under the Erie doctrine. Ignoring state law would produce an outcome different from the result in state court.
Supporting sources
An amendment relates back when the law that supplies the applicable statute of limitations itself permits relation back. The amendment must also arise from the same conduct or occurrence set out in the original pleading.
Supporting sources
A promise to pay an antecedent debt remains binding even if the debt would otherwise be unenforceable solely because of the statute of limitations. The promise operates as a new obligation that restarts the limitations clock.
Supporting sources
A statute that retroactively revives a criminal prosecution after the original limitations period has expired violates the Ex Post Facto Clause. It alters the quantum of evidence the legislature previously deemed sufficient to convict.
Supporting sources
The claim accrues on breach and may be commenced during cohabitation or after termination, subject to the ordinary contractual limitations period.
Supporting sources
…solved by reference to any traditional or common-sense substance-procedure distinction: "And so the question is not whether a statute of limitations is deemed a matter of procedure' in some sense. The question is . . . does it significantly affect the result of a litigation for a federal court to disregard a law of a State that would…