Legal Definitions - several-remedies rule

The several-remedies rule is a legal principle designed to ensure fairness when an individual has multiple legitimate avenues to pursue a legal claim. It essentially pauses, or "tolls," the deadline for filing a lawsuit (known as the statute of limitations) if a person timely initiates their claim in one appropriate legal or administrative setting, and then later needs to pursue the same claim in a different, but also appropriate, setting. This rule applies as long as the opposing party is not unfairly disadvantaged by the change in forum.

In simpler terms, if you start your case on time in one valid place, and then need to move it to another valid place, the clock for filing doesn't run out *while* you're pursuing it in the first place, provided the other side isn't unfairly impacted by the delay or change.

Here are some examples to illustrate how the several-remedies rule might apply:

• Example 1: Consumer Protection Dispute

  Imagine a car owner who discovers a significant defect in their new vehicle shortly after purchase. They have two potential paths: filing a complaint with the state's Department of Consumer Affairs, which offers a mandatory arbitration program for certain car defects, or directly filing a lawsuit in civil court for breach of warranty. The owner chooses to file a complaint with the Department of Consumer Affairs, initiating the arbitration process within the required timeframe. This arbitration takes several months to complete. While the arbitration is ongoing, the general statute of limitations for filing a civil lawsuit for breach of warranty is nearing its end. If the arbitration ultimately fails to resolve the issue, and the owner decides to file a lawsuit in court, the several-remedies rule would likely pause the statute of limitations for the court lawsuit from the time the owner filed with the Department of Consumer Affairs. This allows them to proceed with the court case even if the original deadline has technically passed, as long as the car manufacturer was aware of the ongoing claim and is not unfairly prejudiced by the delay in moving to court.

• Example 2: Employment Discrimination Claim

  Consider an employee who believes they were unfairly terminated due to discrimination. They have the option of filing an administrative complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) or a similar state agency, which is often a prerequisite for filing a discrimination lawsuit in federal court. The employee timely files a complaint with the EEOC, which then conducts an investigation, attempts mediation, and processes the claim for over a year. Eventually, the EEOC issues a "right-to-sue" letter, indicating the employee can now pursue their claim in court. By this time, the general statute of limitations for filing a civil lawsuit for discrimination in court, if counted from the date of termination, has passed. The several-remedies rule would apply here. The employee timely filed their claim in one appropriate forum (the EEOC). The statute of limitations for the court case would be tolled (paused) during the EEOC's processing of the complaint, allowing the employee to file their lawsuit after receiving the right-to-sue letter, provided the employer was aware of the claim through the EEOC process and was not unfairly disadvantaged by the administrative proceedings.

• Example 3: Challenging a Government Decision

  A homeowner applies for a permit to build an addition to their house, but the local planning commission denies the application. The homeowner has two steps to challenge this decision: first, they must file an appeal with the city's Zoning Board of Appeals (an administrative body), and if unsuccessful there, they can then seek judicial review in state court. The homeowner timely files an appeal with the Zoning Board of Appeals, which is a required administrative step. This appeal process takes several months to conclude. After the Zoning Board upholds the denial, the homeowner decides to challenge the decision in state court. If the deadline for filing such a court action, counted from the initial permit denial, has now passed, the several-remedies rule would likely apply. The homeowner timely pursued their claim in the appropriate administrative forum (Zoning Board of Appeals). The statute of limitations for filing the court action would be tolled during the administrative appeal, allowing the homeowner to seek judicial review after the administrative process concludes, as long as the city was aware of the ongoing dispute and not unfairly prejudiced by the time spent in the administrative appeal process.