A state’s statute of limitations places a time limit on the right to file a lawsuit. In other words, it sets a deadline for filing. A plaintiff’s right to pursue a case would disappear, if that same plaintiff were to miss the designated deadline.
No 2 states have the same statute of limitations.
Consequently, no 2 states allow the same amount of time to pass, before the deadline for filing. In some states residents have up to 6 years. In other states residents have just 1 year. The average length of time given to a state’s residents is 2 to 3 years.
The time limit might pause.
Lawyers refer to such a pause as a tolling of the time limit. The nature of a given case determines the reasons why it might toll. If victim of a dog’s bite has given thought to filing a lawsuit, the he or she should know that the time limit would toll/pause, if the dog’s owner were to leave the state for any reason.
That is the most common reason for an exemption to the expected deadline for a dog bite case. Personal injury lawyers in kitchener have become aware of others. For that reason, someone that plans to pursue a dog-bite lawsuit ought to think seriously about hiring a lawyer.
What would be the basis for such a lawsuit?
The answer to that question would depend on the location of the biting incident. In some states a pet owner must command a pet canine to attack an innocent bystander, or perform some other provoking action, in order to be named responsible for the canine’s vicious behavior.
Yet the basis for a charge against a pet owner could be something far simpler in another state. Some states have in their legal code something that is called a liability clause. The existence of that clause makes it much easier for the victim of a canine’s bite to sue the canine’s owner.
What is a strict liability clause?
It is a provision in the law that concerns the liability of certain men and women; those that have chosen to take part in a slightly dangerous activity. It relates to dog biting incidents, due to the fact that any dog might suddenly become aggressive.
A strict liability clause states that a dog’s owner could be held liable for the effects of a dog-bite, even if the same owner had done nothing wrong. All owners of dogs are supposed to control their pets. Those that fail to do so can be charged for any injuries that have been caused by their pet’s behavior. The law does not offer specifics on means for control. Hence, owners might claim attempt to control.