Hearing about lawsuits, we never get the impression that there is a deadline that the court can accept the filing of the case. In the legal world this is dictated by the statute of limitations, a law much varied from state to state and will dictate when and how long the filing period would stand.
This is a disadvantage to the aggrieved party due to its apparent limitation of the availability of justice for their part. The state to state differences in the interpretation of these statutes of limitation can make it very hard for one to get to grips with their situation first before they are thrust into taking immediate action. Not only can this mean that the opportunity of legal action is denied to them, it also means that those who might have filed in time may not have made a thorough examination and assembly of the evidence they have before they start their lawsuit, subsequently giving them a weaker case.
In light of new findings regarding the “date of injury” for hip replacement cases though, many of the old fears pertaining to deadlines dictated by statutes of limitation have been debunked. The date of injury is the starting period when the deadline dictated by the particular statute of limitation is set.
New interpretations of the date of injury now point out to the fact that a failed hip replacement is constantly giving pain to its wearer, and is known as a continuing tort. Because it is declared as so, the date of injury is reset every day for the recipient, so the extension is infinite as long as it is there residing in the body. But what if they have already removed it? Well, the fact that they had it removed means that they are now aware of the harmful effects of the product, and the date of injury can start from there.
No comments:
Post a Comment