The United States Supreme Court recently held that the statute of limitations for claims of fabricated evidence begins to run when the criminal proceeding against the plaintiff has terminated in his or her favor. The claim was brought under Section 1983 of Title 42 of the U.S. Code. This statute is part of the Civil Rights Act of 1871 and allows individuals to bring a civil action against government entities for deprivation of constitutional rights. To prevail in a section § 1983 action, a plaintiff must establish that, while acting under color of state law, the government entity deprived the plaintiff of a constitutional right.
In McDonough v. Smith, No. 18-485, the Plaintiff, McDonough, was a commissioner of a county board of elections in New York. The Defendant, Smith, was appointed to investigate and prosecute a case of forged absentee ballots in an election. McDonough alleged that Smith fabricated evidence to implicate McDonough in forgery and used it to secure a grand jury indictment. Smith then brought the case to trial and presented allegedly fabricated testimony, which ultimately ended in a mistrial. A second trial ended in McDonough’s acquittal.
In just under three years after his acquittal, McDonough brought a civil lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Smith, alleging fabrication of evidence. The district court dismissed the § 1983 suit as untimely, finding that McDonough should have sued within three years of learning that the evidence was fabricated and used against him in a criminal trial. The Second Circuit affirmed the lower court’s dismissal.
The Supreme Court reversed. In these cases, Federal courts typically rely on the state statute of limitations for the tort that is most similar to the plaintiff’s claim. In this case, the Court found that malicious prosecution was the most similar common-law tort to McDonough’s claim. That statute of limitation begins to run only once the underlying criminal proceedings have been resolved in the Plaintiff’s favor. Thus, because McDonough brought the action within three years of his acquittal, his claim was timely.
The case serves to illustrate the complicated nature of the timeliness analysis in 42 U.S.C. § 1983 cases. It is critical to engage an attorney immediately after receiving a complaint alleging constitutional violations brought under § 1983 so these issues can be assessed properly and brought to the attention of the court.
The attorneys at FDAR regularly advise clients on 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims, including defending lawsuits in state and federal court. If you have a specific scenario or complaint in regard to these issues, and would like assistance, contact one of the attorneys at Fishel Downey Albrecht & Riepenhoff LLP at 614.221.1216.