alt Hacker News> Here in the land of the free, it turns out a company only has to honor its contractual obligations for a little while.
Eceryone everywhere appears to hate statuses of limitations, but they exist for a reason, namely that after some time society needs to move on. It may be disappointing, or even cruel, for the victims, but we can't keep litigating the past forever.
Espescially so in the "land of the free" which is the land of lawyers and lawsuits.
Replies
I realize we're talking about a civil case here and not criminal but it's not factually correct to say statutes of limitations always prevent a historical wrong from being addressed. There's a number of jurisdictions which have no statue of limitations on sexual assault cases for example.
Somewhat randomly chosen reference:
https://www.richardnelsonllp.co.uk/guides/statute-of-limitat...
> we can't keep litigating the past forever
It's worth pointing out this reasoning is usually considered self-evident. I've rarely seen anyone doing any kind of deepdive into a practical reason for this.
I don’t understand how that fits the author situation. Society isn’t a party, there is no crime or anything like that. We are talking about contractual terms
I can only hope that my bank will someday feel the same way about my mortgage.