"Unnecessary to Address"?: Tackling the Louisiana Supreme Court's Open Question of Whether a Continuing Tort Can Suspend the Louisiana Unfair Trade Practices Act's One-Year Peremptive Period

Comment by Justin M. Woodard

This Comment analyzes the open issue of whether a continuing tort can suspend the one-year peremptive period for bringing a claim under the Louisiana Unfair Trade Practices Act. It begins by tracking the development of the continuing tort doctrine in Louisiana jurisprudence as a suspension principle to both prescriptive and peremptive limitations periods. After looking at the application of continuing tort to statutory peremptive periods, such as those provided by the Louisiana Medical Malpractice Act and Louisiana Legal Malpractice Act, the Comment turns to the split in the Louisiana Courts of Appeal as to whether a continuing tort can suspend the Louisiana Unfair Trade Practice Act's one-year peremptive period. In response to the Louisiana Supreme Court's recent decision in Miller v. ConAgra, Inc., to leave the issue open, the Comment concludes that a continuing tort should not, in fact, suspend this statutory peremptive period.


About the Author

Justin M. Woodard. J.D. candidate 2011, Tulane University School of Law; B.A. 2008, The University of the South.

Citation

85 Tul. L. Rev. 865 (2011)