Jump to content

Quick question re: Louisiana SOL - What statute?


Recommended Posts

When quoting the 3-year Louisiana SOL on open-accounts (either in a FOAD letter or as an affirmative defense), I imagine it would be good to include the statute number that defines the SOL. I cannot, for the life of me, find the statute that refers to SOL in Louisiana. Can someone please help?


Link to comment
Share on other sites

La Civil Code Art. 3494. Actions subject to a three-year prescription

The following actions are subject to a liberative prescription of three years:

(1) An action for the recovery of compensation for services rendered, including payment of salaries, wages, commissions, tuition fees, professional fees, fees and emoluments of public officials, freight, passage, money, lodging, and board;

(2) An action for arrearages of rent and annuities;

(3) An action on money lent;

(4) An action on an open account; and

(5) An action to recover underpayments or overpayments of royalties from the production of minerals, provided that nothing herein applies to any payments, rent, or royalties derived from state-owned properties.

Acts 1986, No. 1031, §1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The links helped somewhat - I wound up in a Louisiana law search engine, and then dug through them bit by bit. Once I learned that in Louisiana the SOL is referred to as "Liberative Prescription", it was much easier to search.

EDIT - I think I've found the articles dealing with interruption of the SOL period:

La Civil Code Art. 3462. Interruption by filing of suit or by service of process

Prescription is interrupted when the owner commences action against the possessor, or when the obligee commences action against the obligor, in a court of competent jurisdiction and venue. If action is commenced in an incompetent court, or in an improper venue, prescription is interrupted only as to a defendant served by process within the prescriptive period.

Acts 1982, No. 187, §1, eff. Jan. 1, 1983.

La Civil Code Art. 3463. Duration of interruption; abandonment or discontinuance of suit

An interruption of prescription resulting from the filing of a suit in a competent court and in the proper venue or from service of process within the prescriptive period continues as long as the suit is pending. Interruption is considered never to have occurred if the plaintiff abandons, voluntarily dismisses the action at any time either before the defendant has made any appearance of record or thereafter, or fails to prosecute the suit at the trial.

Acts 1982, No. 187, §1, eff. Jan. 1, 1983; Acts 1999, No. 1263, §2, eff. Jan. 1, 2000.

La Civil Code Art. 3464. Interruption by acknowledgment

Prescription is interrupted when one acknowledges the right of the person against whom he had commenced to prescribe.

Acts 1982, No. 187, §1, eff. Jan. 1, 1983.

La Civil Code Art. 3466. Effect of interruption

If prescription is interrupted, the time that has run is not counted. Prescription commences to run anew from the last day of interruption.

Acts 1982, No. 187, §1, eff. Jan. 1, 1983.

According to these articles, the SOL can be interrupted and reset, either by the creditor or the debtor.

Article 3462 establishes that the creditor can interrupt the SOL period by filing suit.

Article 3463 establishes that the interruption of SOL caused by the creditor filing suit lasts as long as the suit is pending.

Article 3464 establishes that the debtor can interrupt the SOL by acknowledging that the debt exists and that the creditor has the right to collect from them. Though it does not expressly state that making payments towards the debt will interrupt the SOL, it could be argued that payment towards a debt constitutes tacit acknowledgment of said debt. In other words, It seems that making a payment or acknowledging ownership of the debt will interrupt the SOL.

Article 3466 establishes that once the SOL period is interrupted, the period of time that has run is no longer counted, and the SOL period begins anew from the time the interruption is complete. The only time that the interruption is considered to have not taken place is when a creditor files suit, but then either abandons or declines to pursue the suit as per Article 3463.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.