Can I Sue for Defamation 8 Years After the Fact

[Lindapamot]

My question involves defamation in the state of: Pennsylvania

[Mr. Knowitall]

I would expect the action to be time-barred, but you would need to share some facts or consult a lawyer with the details.

[RickZ]

I believe that it is usually a time limit of 1 year. 8 years seems absurd. Almost definitely you cannot sue them. The reason why you can't sue them being that - obviously - what they said wasn't that bad because you chose not to sue them at the time. You have now chosen to sue them because of something knew that probably happened and you want to load up your arsenal.

You could always threaten to sue for something that happened 8 years ago, but I am almost certain you cannot.

[Dogmatique]

I believe that it is usually a time limit of 1 year. 8 years seems absurd. Almost definitely you cannot sue them. The reason why you can't sue them being that - obviously - what they said wasn't that bad because you chose not to sue them at the time. You have now chosen to sue them because of something knew that probably happened and you want to load up your arsenal.

You could always threaten to sue for something that happened 8 years ago, but I am almost certain you cannot.

Actually, the SOL in most states is usually around the 2-3 year mark.

In PA, it's 2 years for defamation, 1 year for libel. There can be exceptions to this, and the SOL might also be tolled for various reasons. There's simply not enough information to go any further.

OP can read this

- - - Updated - - -

(And seriously, "what they sad wasn't the bad" doesn't even enter the equation)

[Conrad Hunter]

I don't know anything that would toll the statute of limitations for defamation. Never have seen a case like that.

No state has a SOL that long. 1 or 2 years is usually it. If you had a state actor and sued under civil rights then the SOL is whatever the state is for personal injury, which in Florida is 4 years. Most states are 3 or 4 years.

The only way is if something happened that re-triggered the SOL, such as a totally new publication of the material.

[Dogmatique]

I don't know anything that would toll the statute of limitations for defamation. Never have seen a case like that.

No state has a SOL that long. 1 or 2 years is usually it. If you had a state actor and sued under civil rights then the SOL is whatever the state is for personal injury, which in Florida is 4 years. Most states are 3 or 4 years.

The only way is if something happened that re-triggered the SOL, such as a totally new publication of the material.

1. Try researching. The SOL can indeed be tolled in many places, and for quite a few reasons.

2. You've been told this several times, and I know that admin's hammer is hovering above your head - be careful. And stop posting Florida law when it clearly doesn't apply to the OP's state.

Want to try again?

[Conrad Hunter]

Most statutes in most states come from model laws that are proposed by bar associations and others. Many laws derive from laws in other states as courts adopt them as good guidance. I talk in general terms. I am not wasting my time looking up the law of states I care nothing about. But even my general comments are more useful than some of the garbage you so-called experts post. And I am sure none of you spent a day in law school. I am also sure that you want to always have the last word which is the main motivation for your complaining, especially when none of you offer anything useful.

Let me make this clear, there is NO WAY to toll the statute of limitations for defamation. Find one case, much less PA.

Only certain torts can be tolled, like medical malpractice claims. Even then, tort reform has placed severe restrictions on tolling any SOL. The defendant leaving the state might toll an SOL but that would rarely apply in a defamation case.

In addition to being a very long shot, which you have no clue about any more than me, no attorney will take a case like that on contingency and the odds of proving damages after that long is remote.

So exactly what are you telling the OP and what is YOUR recommendation. Oh I know, what you people usually say,
"go talk to a lawyer."

Do you people even read any case law? I read case law every day so I have a pretty good understanding of what the courts are doing in state and federal jurisdictions. I am currently doing two defamation cases, one in state court and one in US District Court. Both are very unusual and there are things I don't know, but I admit it. The state case had multiple defendants and the newspaper just settled for $26,000. They were actually a minor defendant which is unusual in itself. What cases have you done?

[Dogmatique]

Really, "Conrad"? Really?

Please - just stop. You're embarrassing yourself. And you've already proven elsewhere (before you were basically shooed out by people who know better than you), your "advice" isn't exactly stellar.

Please, if you have any humanity in you, quit this nonsense. You're not "doing" any cases. You're not an attorney. You're not even involved.

Ignore or bitch at me, that's fine. Heck, send me messages if you feel the need. But don't abuse the other posters who are actually seeking help.

[Conrad Hunter]

And EXACTLY WHAT HELP have you provided in this thread?

Did you look up PA law? Did you research any case law on the subject?

Of course not, so what are YOU talking about. You are the one embarrassing yourself by your dribble what really says nothing.

Abuse the other posters? You do that just fine yourself. You offered NOTHING except unfounded speculation. You are the one that comments on threads you know nothing about and then don't even offer anything meaningful. Yes, there are subjects you know and do a good job on, but SOL on defamation is certainly not one of them.

Again, exactly WHAT did you offer to the OP that was of ANY value? Unfounded speculation is all you got. At least my opinions are based on legal principle and from reading lots of case law.

- - - Updated - - -

Okay, lets see who knows what they are talking about. Read this. Feel free to look it up on the web and read the entire decision.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
ARTHUR ALAN WOLK, ESQUIRE : CIVIL ACTION
:
v. :
:
WALTER K. OLSON, et al : NO. 09-4001

MEMORANDUM
McLaughlin, J. August 2, 2010
The issue before the Court is whether the Pennsylvania
Supreme Court would apply the discovery rule to toll the statute
of limitations in a mass-media defamation case. The Court holds
that it would not.

Pennsylvania’s one-year statute of limitations for
defamation applies to all three claims.1 See 42 Pa. Cons. Stat.
Ann. § 5523(a) (2010); Menichini v. Grant, 995 F.2d 1224, 1228
n.2 (3d Cir. 1993). The statute began to run from the time of
publication. See Dominiak v. Nat’l Enquirer, 266 A.2d 626, 629-
30 (Pa. 1970).

Tasting a little crow?

PS: The OP didn't even claim that a lack of discovery of the defamation caused the delay.

[Dogmatique]

Try again.