Can I Sue for Defamation 8 Years After the Fact

[Adam G]

Try again.

The statute of limitations for a defamation cause of action is one year in Pennsylvania. 42 Pa.C.S. § 5523(1)

I found two reported Pennsylvania cases in which the plaintiff attempted to toll the statute of limitations on a defamation claim. In Dellape v. Murray, 651 A.2d 638 (Pa. Cmwlth., 1994), the appellate court rejected plaintiff's contention that active duty military service and the Soldiers' and Sailors' Civil Relief Act of 1940 tolled the SOL. In Abernethy v. Williams, 584 A.2d 1085, 136 Pa.Cmwlth. 715 (Pa. Cmwlth., 1990), plaintiff argued that the SOL on defamation actions was tolled because he was subject to a mandatory arbitration provision in his contract with the local police department. The appellate court disagreed and upheld the dismissal.

FYI

[tex11]

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

Conrad, you are incorrect.

Some jurisdictions will allow the statute of limitations for defamation to be tolled based upon the Discovery Rule. Where the discovery rule applies, the cause of action accrues when the plaintiff knows, or through the exercise of reasonable care and diligence should have discovered, the nature of his injury and the likelihood that it was caused by the wrongful acts of another...

Although this is a limited exception, I have reviewed case law of where it was successfully used, and personally know one case of defamation per se in which it was used. At least in Texas, once the Discovery Rule is invoked, the burden falls on the defendant to negate it, and the question of whether or not this rule applies can be taken to a jury.

http://causeofactionelements.blogspo...efense-to.html

[Conrad Hunter]

Please read the original post. This is in PA.

I get bitched at for using examples from my state and other states I am aware when it is not the OP's state. Though half the time they don't even tell us what state they are in.

I have seen very limited application of the discovery rule in defamation cases. It is universally shot down when the publication involves any media. There is a recent CA case were some Rabbi thought he was libeled in an interview transcript and it went to only 10 people, but the CA Supreme Court held the publication rule applied. Too bad for the rabbi he took years to learn about it. I have read cases where the judges said there was perhaps a situation where it would apply but their case wasn't it. I have read a number of cases where the person had a good excuse, but it never flew.

You tell me I am incorrect because you came up with one Texas case? I am talking about general rules and how things work, not the rare freaking exception someone could come up with if they really tried, which would do the original poster no good whatsoever. I don't care what their excuse is for 8 years, there is not a chance in hades that is going to get past any judge. And chances are, in most of these cases, the publication was so minor proving actual damages would be impossible.

Now if there is a distinct republication to restart the clock, that is a separate matter and I just had a defendant in another state stupid enough to mail the defamatory publication into Florida after they were warned. Not only does it restart the clock, but it gives me jurisdiction in U.S. District Court here.

[tex11]

...You tell me I am incorrect because you came up with one Texas case? I am talking about general rules and how things work...

ONE case? Several cases were quoted on my link, and there are others beyond this.

YOU are the one who unequivocally stated there is NO WAY to toll the statute of limitations for defamation, and challenged anyone to find even ONE case. You have that case and more. Please resist the urge to shoot from the hip with incorrect legal conclusions based upon your limited understanding of "general rules and how things work".

You apparently do not have as good an understanding about "general rules and how things work" as you think when you spout off on this forum you have a chance in Hades of getting a state court of appeals to rule in your favor in a manner that will afford you as a pro se an opportunity to make a "case of first impressions".

I challenge you to find any precedent that suggests this is even a remote possibility in a civil case, much less a defamation case.

[aaron]

We're taking about Pennsylvania, so let's try to make the legal commentary relevant to Pennsylvania.

The tolling of the statute of limitations under the discovery rule is discussed in Gallucci v. Phillips & Jacobs, 614 A.2d 284, 312 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1992)

In addressing whether the trial court properly applied the discovery rule to the defamation action, we are constrained by certain well-established rules of law. "`It is well established that an individual asserting a cause of action is required to use due diligence to properly inform himself or herself of the facts and circumstances upon which the claimed right of recovery is based and to institute suit within the applicable statute of limitations.'" Hunsicker v. Connor, 318 Pa.Super. 418, 421, 465 A.2d 24, 26 (1983) (quoting Petri v. Smith, 307 Pa.Super. 261, 268, 453 A.2d 342, 346 (1982)). "`[M]ere mistake, misunderstanding or lack of knowledge do not toll the running of the statute of limitations.' Although `we shall surely do equity whenever possible, ... we may not act in derogation of the express limitations enacted by our legislature.'"Hunsicker, 318 Pa.Super. at 423, 465 A.2d at 27 (citation omitted). The discovery rule is an exception to these general rules. Under the discovery rule "... the statute of limitations does not begin to run `until the plaintiff has discovered his injury, or, in the exercise of reasonable diligence, should have discovered his injury.'" Corbett v. Weisband, 380 Pa.Super. 292, 309, 551 A.2d 1059, 1068 (1988) (citation omitted). The discovery rule arises out of an "... inability of the injured, despite the exercise of due diligence, to know of the injury or its cause." Pocono International Raceway v. Pocono Produce, 503 Pa. 80, 85, 468 A.2d 468, 471 (1983).

In PA, it's 2 years for defamation, 1 year for libel.

I'm seeing one year for all of it - 42 Pa.C.S.A. Sec. 5523. Is there another statute I've overlooked?

[free9man]

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.

After listening to his nonsense all this time, you have piqued my curiosity. Time to go A'Googlin'