A Society Without a Name v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 655 F.3d 342 (2011)

Citation: A Society Without a Name v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 655 F.3d 342 (2011)
Parent Document: A Society Without a Name v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 655 F.3d 342 (2011)
Jurisdiction: United States (federal)
Effective Date: 2011-08-24
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/612506/a-society-without-a-name-v-commo... ↗

Full Text

632 chars

Second, limitations is an affirmative defense that a defen-
dant, not a plaintiff, must prove; ASWAN opposed an "act or
practice made unlawful" by the ADA, which limitations does
not necessarily bar. Moreover, no case law exists assessing
whether a clearly meritorious affirmative defense negates a
"reasonable, good faith belief" of an "act or practice made
unlawful" by the ADA. Further, no appellate court had even
settled the question of which statute of limitations applies in
Virginia, making it hard for ASWAN to "reasonably believe"
its claims time-barred given that the ADA itself does not pre-
scribe a limitations period.

Other Sections in This Document (158)

Full Text