Legal Definitions - shorter-term rule

The shorter-term rule, also known as the Rule of the Shorter Term, is a principle in conflict of laws that helps courts decide which statute of limitations to apply when a legal dispute involves parties or events from different jurisdictions (e.g., different states or countries), and those jurisdictions have different time limits for bringing a lawsuit.

Essentially, when faced with a choice between two or more potentially applicable statutes of limitations, the rule dictates that the court will apply the shorter of the relevant time limits. This applies whether the shorter period is from the jurisdiction where the lawsuit is filed (the "forum state") or from the jurisdiction where the events giving rise to the lawsuit occurred (the "state of the cause of action"). The primary purpose of this rule is to prevent parties from deliberately choosing a court with a more favorable, longer time limit (a practice known as "forum shopping") and to encourage the prompt resolution of legal claims.

• Example 1: Interstate Car Accident

  Imagine a driver from California (which has a 2-year statute of limitations for personal injury claims) is involved in a car accident in Arizona (which has a 1-year statute of limitations for similar claims). The California driver decides to file a lawsuit against the at-fault driver in a California court.

  How it illustrates the term: Even though the lawsuit is filed in California, a California court applying the Rule of the Shorter Term would likely apply Arizona's 1-year statute of limitations because the accident occurred in Arizona and its time limit is shorter than California's. This prevents the plaintiff from benefiting from California's longer period by simply filing the lawsuit in their home state after the Arizona deadline has passed.

• Example 2: Contract Dispute Across State Lines

  A business based in Texas (which has a 4-year statute of limitations for breach of contract claims) enters into a contract with a client in New York (which has a 6-year statute of limitations for similar claims). The contract is breached, and the breach occurs in Texas. The New York client decides to sue the Texas business in a New York court.

  How it illustrates the term: A New York court, following the Rule of the Shorter Term, would likely apply Texas's 4-year statute of limitations because the breach occurred in Texas and its time limit is shorter than New York's. This ensures that the claim is brought within the more restrictive period tied to where the breach happened.

• Example 3: Product Liability Claim

  A consumer purchases a defective appliance in Oregon, where they reside. The appliance causes an injury in Oregon. Oregon has a 3-year statute of limitations for product liability claims. The manufacturer of the appliance is based in Washington, which has a 6-year statute of limitations for similar claims. The consumer, aware of Oregon's shorter deadline, decides to file a lawsuit against the manufacturer in a Washington court.

  How it illustrates the term: A court in Washington, applying the Rule of the Shorter Term, would likely apply Oregon's 3-year statute of limitations because the injury occurred in Oregon and its statute of limitations is shorter. This prevents the consumer from "forum shopping" – choosing Washington solely to take advantage of its longer time limit after the time limit in the place of injury (Oregon) has already expired.