Got a call from a potential client today with quite a tale of woe.
Allegedly, he had gotten ripped off of his money by his father from the time he was a kid moving forward into his adulthood. Thus included forging his son's name onto checks the kid received once he was of age and the conservatorship over the kids funds ended. Allegedly a couple hundred thousand dollars worth of an inheritance.
His father even apparently told him he did it and asked him what he was going to do about it when he was an adult.
He then asked if he could do anything about it now.
Well, that depends I say.
When did his father tell him he was doing it and when did he discover it had occurred?
1990.
Blink. Just so we're clear, that was 32 years ago that he found out about the dastardly deeds of skullduggery.
You see, there's this little, yet rather very important, concept of the statute of limitations.
Sitting on your rights, and not doing anything for 32 years, really runs out the clock on your rights.
Let's put it this way, the civil fraud statute of limitations is 6 years, not 32 years.
Heck, even the criminal statute of limitations for forging a signature on a check is 10 years.
When you're five times beyond the civil statutory period, there's not really anything that can be done.
So no, he doesn't get to civilly pursue this one after waiting far too long.
3 comments:
My only question is how old was the client in 1990. If not 18 would he not be able to prosecute then?
glasslass: Yep, he was an adult in 1990 when he found it out. Had he been under 18 he'd get turning 18 + the statute of limitations time, but 30 years later makes it a mathematical impossibility regardless.
Wow...
Post a Comment