Statute of repose
A statute of repose is a legislative provision that imposes an absolute time limit on bringing certain civil claims, measured from a defined triggering event—such as the substantial completion of construction, delivery of a product, or occurrence of negligence—regardless of whether the plaintiff has suffered injury or discovered the harm.[1] Unlike a statute of limitations, which typically commences upon accrual of the cause of action (often tied to the injury's occurrence or discovery) and can be tolled for reasons like fraud or incapacity, a statute of repose functions as a substantive cutoff that extinguishes the right to sue outright after the period elapses, even for latent defects manifesting later.[2] These statutes primarily serve to shield defendants, such as manufacturers, builders, and designers, from indefinite liability exposure, thereby promoting economic stability, investment in long-term projects, and the avoidance of stale evidence in protracted claims.[3] Enacted predominantly at the state level in the United States, statutes of repose commonly apply to products liability (e.g., 10–15 years from sale or manufacture) and construction defects (often 4–10 years from project completion), though federal laws incorporate similar mechanisms in areas like aviation and medical devices.[4] Their adoption surged in the mid-20th century amid concerns over escalating tort costs, with proponents arguing they mitigate "long-tail" risks that deter innovation and raise insurance premiums, as empirical analyses indicate most defects surface within shorter windows (e.g., over 99% of architect claims within 10 years).[5] Controversies persist, however, as critics contend these rigid bars deny due process and remedies for injuries from durable goods or hidden flaws emerging post-repose (e.g., asbestos-related harms decades later), framing the debate as a tension between defendant certainty and plaintiff access to justice, with constitutional challenges often hinging on rational basis review favoring economic policy over individual redress.[6][7] Despite such disputes, statutes of repose have withstood most due process scrutiny, underscoring legislatures' broad authority to balance competing interests in tort reform.[8]Definition and Core Concepts
Definition
A statute of repose is a statutory provision that imposes an absolute outer time limit on the period during which a plaintiff may initiate a civil action against a defendant, measured from a specific triggering event related to the defendant's conduct, such as the date of manufacture, sale, or substantial completion of a product, structure, or service, irrespective of when the injury occurs or is discovered.[1][2] This limit extinguishes the right to bring a claim even if no harm has yet manifested, effectively barring suits filed after the repose period expires.[3][9] Unlike procedural rules that merely regulate the timing of litigation, a statute of repose operates as a substantive condition precedent to liability, creating a fixed cutoff that defendants can rely upon for certainty against indefinite exposure.[1][3] Repose periods vary by jurisdiction and context but commonly range from 6 to 15 years; for instance, many U.S. states apply a 10-year repose in construction defect cases from the date of substantial completion.[9][10] These laws are codified in fields like products liability, construction, and professional services to immunize actors from claims arising long after the relevant act.[2][11] Federal statutes, such as the 15-year repose under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) for certain contribution claims, exemplify this mechanism, starting the clock from the date of contractual settlement rather than injury manifestation.[1] In practice, repose statutes override tolling provisions or discovery rules that might extend limitations periods, ensuring claims are time-barred proactively.[3][9]Purpose and Rationale
Statutes of repose serve primarily to grant defendants a substantive right to immunity from liability after a fixed period following their actionable conduct, such as the sale of a product or substantial completion of construction, irrespective of when any injury manifests. This cutoff promotes economic predictability by shielding manufacturers, builders, and design professionals from indefinite exposure to claims, which could otherwise deter investment and innovation due to the risk of unforeseen long-term harms. For instance, in construction contexts, such statutes typically impose a 10-year limit from project completion, reflecting legislative judgments that prolonged liability undermines the viability of large-scale projects by inflating insurance costs and discouraging participation in high-risk endeavors.[12][13][14] The rationale also emphasizes protection against the evidentiary challenges of stale claims, where the passage of decades erodes witness availability, document integrity, and accurate reconstruction of events, thereby increasing the likelihood of erroneous judgments. By establishing repose as a non-waivable barrier—unlike tollable statutes of limitations—these laws prioritize public welfare through balanced risk allocation, ensuring that industries can operate without perpetual overhang while still allowing timely suits for discoverable injuries. Empirical support for this approach appears in widespread adoption across U.S. jurisdictions, where repose periods are calibrated to align with material degradation timelines or product lifespans, as seen in product liability statutes that bar actions beyond specified intervals from manufacture or delivery.[15][3][16] Critics, often from plaintiff advocacy perspectives, argue that repose unfairly denies redress for latent harms, but proponents counter that the mechanism fosters causal realism by tying accountability to controllable events rather than unpredictable future occurrences, thereby encouraging proactive safety measures within feasible bounds. This framework aligns with broader policy aims of curtailing "infinite liability" risks that could cascade into higher societal costs via reduced economic activity, as evidenced by state legislative findings prioritizing professional repose to sustain building and engineering sectors.[17][3]Key Features and Mechanisms
A statute of repose establishes an absolute cutoff period for initiating legal claims, typically measured from a specific event tied to the defendant's conduct, such as the date of manufacture, sale, or substantial completion of a product or improvement, rather than from the occurrence or discovery of injury.[1][3] This mechanism extinguishes the right to sue after the expiration of the fixed term—often 10 to 15 years, depending on the jurisdiction and context—regardless of when harm manifests or is discovered, thereby preventing indefinite exposure to liability.[2][18] Unlike statutes of limitations, which are generally subject to tolling doctrines such as the discovery rule, fraudulent concealment, or minority/incapacity of the plaintiff, statutes of repose operate as substantive limitations that override these equitable extensions, creating a hard deadline immune to such delays.[19][1] This design serves to promote certainty for defendants, particularly in fields like manufacturing and construction, by capping the temporal scope of potential accountability after evidence preservation becomes impractical and witnesses' memories fade.[3][9] The triggering event for the repose period is narrowly defined to mark the conclusion of the defendant's role, such as the delivery of a product into the stream of commerce or the acceptance of a construction project, ensuring the clock starts independently of plaintiff-side factors.[1][20] In practice, this can bar claims before any injury occurs, as seen in product liability where a 10-year period from sale may expire prior to latent defects emerging, emphasizing repose as a policy tool to balance innovation and risk allocation over perpetual litigation threats.[21][22] Jurisdictional variations exist, with some states incorporating limited exceptions for willful misconduct but maintaining the overall rigidity to avoid undermining the statute's protective intent.[2]Distinction from Statute of Limitations
Timing and Triggering Events
The statute of limitations generally begins to run upon the accrual of the cause of action, which occurs at the time of the injury or damage, or in jurisdictions applying the discovery rule, upon the plaintiff's reasonable discovery of the injury and its cause.[2][23] This plaintiff-oriented trigger allows claims to be tolled until harm manifests, potentially extending the period for filing based on latent defects or delayed awareness.[24][3] By contrast, the statute of repose is triggered by a fixed, defendant-centric event unrelated to the injury, such as the substantial completion of a construction project, the delivery or first sale of a product, or the defendant's last culpable act in the chain of events leading to potential liability.[2][24][9] This absolute cutoff operates independently of discovery or harm, extinguishing the right to sue after the repose period elapses even if no injury has occurred or been detected.[23][25] In construction contexts, the triggering event is commonly the date of substantial completion or occupancy, as defined by state statutes, which starts the repose clock regardless of subsequent defects emerging years later.[9][25] For product liability, repose periods often commence from the date of manufacture, sale to the first user, or possession by the end-user, shielding manufacturers from indefinite exposure once the product enters the stream of commerce.[24][4] Jurisdictional variations exist; for example, some states tie the start to the last provision of services or materials, but the core principle remains an outer limit from an objective milestone to promote repose for defendants.[3][26]Substantive vs. Procedural Nature
Statutes of repose are classified as substantive law because they extinguish the plaintiff's underlying right to bring a claim after a fixed period from the defendant's act or omission, irrespective of when the injury occurs or is discovered, thereby creating an affirmative defense or right for the defendant to avoid liability altogether.[27][28] In contrast, statutes of limitations are deemed procedural, as they merely bar the enforcement of an existing remedy after accrual of the cause of action, without eliminating the substantive right itself.[3] This distinction arises from the repose's retrospective focus on the defendant's conduct and its legislative intent to impose an absolute cutoff, which courts view as defining the scope of liability rather than regulating litigation timing.[29] The substantive characterization holds significant implications in federal diversity jurisdiction under the Erie doctrine, where state substantive law governs, requiring federal courts to apply the forum state's statute of repose rather than federal procedural rules.[30] For instance, in product liability cases, if a state's repose period has expired, the defendant may invoke it as a substantive bar, preventing suit even if federal tolling rules might otherwise apply to limitations periods.[5] Courts have consistently upheld this view, noting that repose does not require affirmative pleading as a defense in the same manner as procedural limitations, underscoring its role in defining enforceable rights.[31] The U.S. Supreme Court reinforced the substantive nature of repose in CTS Corp. v. Waldburger (2014), distinguishing it from limitations by emphasizing that repose embodies a policy judgment freeing defendants from indefinite liability exposure after a set time, which aligns with substantive limitations on causes of action rather than procedural hurdles to suit.[29] This ruling clarified that federal statutes like CERCLA's discovery rule preempt only state limitations, not repose provisions, as the latter independently define the boundaries of state-created rights.[32] In conflict-of-laws contexts, the substantive label similarly directs courts to apply the law of the state with the most significant relationship to the defendant's act, prioritizing repose over forum procedural rules.[33] While some jurisdictions debate nuances—such as whether repose operates as a condition precedent to liability— the prevailing judicial consensus treats it as substantive to preserve legislative intent against erosion by procedural maneuvers.[8]Practical Implications for Litigation
In litigation, a statute of repose provides defendants with a substantive defense that can lead to early dismissal of claims via motion for summary judgment, as it imposes an absolute cutoff unrelated to the plaintiff's discovery of injury or accrual of the cause of action.[3] Unlike a statute of limitations, which may be tolled or extended under discovery rules, a repose period typically admits few exceptions, barring suits even if latent defects emerge after the fixed timeframe from the triggering event, such as product sale or construction completion.[16] This forces plaintiffs to investigate and file claims proactively within the repose window, often complicating strategies in long-tail liabilities like asbestos or medical device failures, where injuries may manifest decades later.[34] For defendants in product liability cases, the repose acts as a shield against indefinite exposure, exemplified by scenarios where a claim is dismissed if filed more than 12 years after manufacture, regardless of recent harm, as seen in Florida's statute barring actions for products over that age.[35] In construction defect suits, it similarly truncates litigation timelines; for instance, Pennsylvania's 12-year (extendable to 14) period from substantial completion can preclude claims for property damage discovered post-expiration, prompting defendants to assert repose early to avoid costly discovery.[36] Courts treat repose as non-waivable and substantive, often applying choice-of-law analysis favoring the jurisdiction with the shortest period, which influences forum selection and can deter cross-jurisdictional filings.[27] Plaintiffs face heightened evidentiary burdens to prove the triggering event fell within the repose period, and while some jurisdictions allow narrow tolling for fraud or concealment, most repose statutes resist equitable extensions, leading to outright preclusion before any merits review.[6] This distinction amplifies risks in class actions, where repose may independently bar opt-in members whose individual timelines have lapsed, overriding limitations tolling from class certification.[37] Overall, repose shifts leverage toward defendants by enforcing predictability and finality, reducing protracted litigation but occasionally sparking due process challenges when it extinguishes viable claims pre-injury.[8]Historical Development
Origins and Early Common Law Roots
The doctrine of repose emerged from English common law principles aimed at promoting certainty in legal claims and preventing indefinite liability, particularly through early time limitations on real property actions. As early as the 13th century, statutes such as the Statute of Westminster I (1275) imposed a 20-year limit on certain writs for land recovery, reflecting a policy against litigating ancient titles to foster repose and economic stability.[38] These measures, rooted in Roman law influences reintroduced via medieval canon law, presumed that long unchallenged possession evidenced rightful ownership, barring claims after fixed periods to avoid evidentiary decay and encourage reliance on established possession.[38] A key antecedent was the doctrine of prescription, which analogously presumed the acquisition of property rights or defenses through continuous, open possession or use over extended periods, often 20 years, thereby extinguishing contrary claims regardless of initial validity.[20] In English law, this doctrine applied to easements and titles, providing defendants with immunity from stale challenges by shifting the burden to prove recent disruption.[20] American courts in the 19th century adopted similar repose rules, such as a common law 20-year bar on adverse claims to promote finality, as seen in cases like Matthews v. McDade (1882), where Alabama courts enforced repose to halt perpetual litigation over old defects.[20] In tort and construction contexts, early common law further limited exposure by confining builder or architect liability to fraud, collusion, or contractual privity, implicitly rejecting perpetual accountability for latent defects absent willful misconduct.[39] This approach, inherited from English precedents, prioritized defendants' need for closure after reasonable diligence periods, aligning with broader equitable doctrines like laches that barred delayed suits due to prejudice or neglect.[40] Such roots underscored a causal rationale: indefinite liability discouraged innovation and investment by undermining predictability, principles later codified in statutes of repose to extend absolute bars from acts like construction completion rather than injury discovery.[8]Modern Codification in US Jurisdictions
Statutes of repose were codified in modern US law largely as a legislative response to the mid-20th-century expansion of common-law tort liability, which eroded traditional barriers such as privity of contract and introduced discovery rules that permitted claims long after an event, exposing defendants—particularly in construction, products, and professional services—to indefinite exposure.[6] This shift, accelerating from the late 1950s, prompted industry groups like architects and builders to lobby for fixed outer limits on liability to facilitate insurance, planning, and economic stability.[39] Early codifications focused on construction defects, with Wisconsin enacting the first such statute in 1961 to shield design professionals from perpetual claims arising from improvements to real property.[40] Adoption accelerated in the late 1960s and 1970s, as states addressed rising litigation volumes and insurance crises tied to long-tail risks. Pennsylvania followed with its construction statute of repose in 1965, setting a 12-year limit from substantial completion.[41] By the early 1980s, the trend had spread widely, with statutes typically imposing 4- to 15-year periods triggered by events like project completion or product sale, often excluding fraud or concealment.[39] These laws were embedded in state codes as substantive defenses, distinct from procedural statutes of limitations, and faced constitutional challenges under due process and equal protection clauses, though most were upheld by state supreme courts by the mid-1980s, affirming legislative authority to balance plaintiff access against defendant certainty.[6] The 1980s tort reform wave extended codification beyond construction to products liability in approximately 24 states, responding to strict liability doctrines and mass tort surges that threatened manufacturing viability.[42] Florida, for instance, enacted a products statute in 1974, initially setting a 12-year limit from manufacture or sale, though it underwent revisions following court rulings.[43] By the 1990s, all 50 states had codified some form of repose statutes across fields, with construction-specific ones in 48 jurisdictions, varying in duration (e.g., 6 years in some states, 10-12 in others) and applicability to indemnity or third-party claims.[44] Federal analogs emerged selectively, such as in aviation under the General Aviation Revitalization Act of 1994, but state laws predominate, reflecting federalism in tort policy.[13] This patchwork codification underscores repose statutes' role in curbing "stale" claims while preserving core limitations periods for discovered injuries.[6]Applications in Specific Fields
Product Liability
In product liability actions, statutes of repose impose an outer limit on claims alleging defects in manufactured goods, typically measured from the date the product first enters the stream of commerce—such as its sale, lease, or delivery to the initial purchaser or user—irrespective of when the harm manifests or is discovered.[2][45] This mechanism shields manufacturers, distributors, and sellers from indefinite exposure to litigation over products no longer under their control, where evidence may deteriorate and witnesses become unavailable.[46] Unlike statutes of limitations, which accrue upon injury or discovery, repose periods run forward from a fixed event, often extinguishing claims for latent defects emerging after the deadline, such as in cases involving asbestos or pharmaceuticals with delayed effects.[47] These statutes vary widely across U.S. jurisdictions, with approximately 44 states and the District of Columbia imposing product-specific repose periods as of recent analyses, though enforcement and exact triggers differ.[24] Durations commonly range from 6 to 15 years; for example, Alabama sets a 10-year limit from the product's sale, Arizona a 12-year cap from manufacture or sale, and Iowa a 15-year period from purchase by the initial consumer.[24][5] States without such statutes, including California, New York, and Washington, rely solely on statutes of limitations, potentially extending manufacturer liability indefinitely for undiscovered defects.[48] Some provisions include exceptions, such as tolling for fraud or concealment, or extended periods for products with express warranties exceeding the repose term, as in Kentucky's 15-year limit absent longer representations.[49][34]| State Example | Repose Duration | Trigger Event |
|---|---|---|
| Alabama | 10 years | Date of sale to user[24] |
| Arizona | 12 years | Date of manufacture or sale[24] |
| Colorado | 10 years (presumption of non-defect) | First sale for use[34] |
| Maryland | 20 years | Use or consumption[50] |
| Iowa | 15 years | Purchase by initial consumer[5] |
Construction and Real Property Improvements
Statutes of repose for construction and real property improvements impose absolute time bars on claims arising from defects in the design, construction, or repair of buildings and other permanent fixtures to land, shielding architects, engineers, contractors, and builders from liability after a fixed period measured from substantial completion or acceptance of the work.[52] These provisions address latent defects that may cause personal injury, property damage, or economic loss years after completion, when evidence has deteriorated and key personnel are unavailable.[53] Over 30 states enact such statutes, typically setting a 10-year repose period, though durations range from 4 to 15 years depending on jurisdiction and claim type.[13] [54] The repose clock generally starts upon substantial completion, defined as the point when the improvement is usable for its intended purpose, even if minor work remains, rather than final certificate of occupancy or full project handover in multi-phase developments.[55] For instance, in Massachusetts, courts have ruled that for phased projects, the period begins after the entire improvement's completion, not individual phases.[55] Claims barred include those for negligence in design or workmanship leading to structural failures, such as collapsing roofs or faulty foundations, but exclusions often apply for willful misconduct, fraud, or defects known to the defendant before repose expiration.[52] Subsequent repairs by the original party do not toll or restart the period, as affirmed in Pennsylvania's Venema v. Moser Builders, Inc. (2022), where post-completion fixes failed to extend liability.[56] State-specific variations reflect policy balances between owner protections and professional incentives for quality work; for example, Arizona limits claims to 8 years from substantial completion (extendable to 9 if discovered in year 8), Pennsylvania to 12 years, and Texas to 10 years for residential construction as of 2024 amendments.[48] [41] [57] These statutes apply narrowly to "improvements to real property," encompassing affixed structures like bridges or HVAC systems but excluding detachable equipment treated as products.[58] In states without repose, like California (pre-2020 for certain claims), longer limitation periods tied to discovery prevail, potentially exposing professionals to indefinite suits.[54] Empirical rationale emphasizes insurability and economic predictability, as protracted exposure discourages investment in durable infrastructure.[59]Medical Malpractice
In medical malpractice litigation, statutes of repose impose an absolute cutoff period, typically measured from the date of the alleged negligent act or omission, beyond which no claim may be filed regardless of when the injury is discovered or harm manifests.[2] This contrasts with statutes of limitations, which often incorporate a discovery rule allowing claims within a reasonable time after the plaintiff learns of the injury and its cause. Repose periods in this field aim to shield healthcare providers from indefinite liability exposure, particularly for latent injuries such as those from misdiagnoses or surgical errors that may surface years later.[60] State implementations vary widely, with repose durations commonly ranging from four to seven years, though some jurisdictions lack such statutes or apply exceptions for minors and foreign objects left in the body. For instance, Georgia enforces a five-year repose from the medical act causing injury or death, barring suits even if symptoms emerge afterward.[61] Ohio applies a four-year repose to medical claims, including wrongful death and derivative actions like loss of consortium, as affirmed by the state Supreme Court in Everhart v. Coshocton County Memorial Hospital (2023), which resolved appellate splits by holding that the repose extinguishes underlying claims before derivative ones vest.[62][63] Missouri upholds a ten-year repose specifically for foreign-object malpractice, as in Ambers-Phillips v. SSM DePaul Health Center (2015), where the Supreme Court rejected due process challenges.[64] Several state courts have invalidated medical malpractice repose statutes on constitutional grounds, citing violations of open courts provisions or right-to-remedy doctrines when they preclude claims for undiscovered harms. Pennsylvania's seven-year MCARE Act repose was struck down in Yanakos v. UPMC (2019) by a 4-3 Supreme Court decision, which deemed it an unreasonable barrier to access justice without advancing legislative goals like error reduction.[65][66] Washington's eight-year statute met a similar fate, with the Supreme Court ruling it unconstitutional for barring actions where causation remains unknowable within the fixed term.[67] Such rulings highlight tensions between provider accountability and plaintiff remedies, with proponents arguing repose fosters predictability and curbs defensive medicine, though direct empirical evidence on claim frequency or insurance premiums tied to repose remains limited in peer-reviewed studies.[68]Estate Administration and Probate Claims
In the context of estate administration, statutes of repose, often embodied in state nonclaim statutes, impose absolute time bars on creditor claims against a decedent's estate, typically measured from the date of death or the issuance of letters testamentary or administration, irrespective of when the claim accrues or is discovered.[69] These provisions function as repose mechanisms by extinguishing legal rights after a fixed period, promoting finality in probate proceedings and enabling prompt distribution of assets to heirs or beneficiaries without indefinite liability exposure.[70] Unlike statutes of limitations, which may toll for concealment or incapacity, nonclaim statutes generally operate without such extensions, barring unfiled claims against the estate, personal representative, heirs, and devisees.[71] Personal representatives are required to provide notice to known creditors and publish general notice, triggering the repose period; failure to file within the statutory window—commonly 3 to 7 months after notice—results in disallowance of the claim, even if otherwise valid.[70] For instance, in New York, creditors have seven months from the issuance of letters testamentary or administration to present claims, after which the executor or administrator may distribute assets free of those obligations.[72] Florida's statute establishes a two-year outer limit from death for most claims, beyond which neither the personal representative nor heirs or beneficiaries incur liability, except for secured claims like mortgages that survive against the property itself.[73] Georgia imposes a six-year repose for pre-death claims against the estate, running from the decedent's death.[74] These statutes extend to bar not only contract and tort claims but also contingent or unmatured demands, such as those arising from guarantees or future-due obligations, ensuring comprehensive closure.[71] Exceptions typically preserve government claims (e.g., taxes) or recorded liens, which may persist against estate property despite the repose bar.[73] The U.S. Supreme Court in Tulsa Professional Collection Services, Inc. v. Pope (1988) upheld such nonclaim provisions against due process challenges when states mandate actual notice to known or reasonably ascertainable creditors, affirming their role in balancing creditor rights with estate finality, provided probate proceedings are initiated.[69] Empirical application reveals these repose periods facilitate efficient administration, as evidenced by state probate codes prioritizing asset liquidity over protracted litigation; however, variances across jurisdictions—such as Washington's four-month limit post-notice under RCW 11.40—underscore the need for executors to adhere strictly to local requirements to invoke the bar effectively.[70] Failure to comply with notice mandates can extend vulnerability, potentially converting the repose into a discoverability-based limitation.[69]Other Specialized Areas
Statutes of repose apply in aviation litigation through the General Aviation Revitalization Act of 1994 (GARA), which establishes an 18-year period barring civil actions against manufacturers of general aviation aircraft (those with fewer than 20 passenger seats) and component parts for harm arising from design, manufacturing, or assembly defects, measured from the date of delivery to the first purchaser or lessee.[75] This federal preemption overrides conflicting state laws, providing industry finality but with exceptions for cases involving the manufacturer's knowing misrepresentation, falsification of records, or harm during the aircraft's manufacture, assembly, or overhaul; claims by passengers for medical monitoring; or government claims.[76] GARA's enactment addressed the general aviation sector's economic decline, attributed partly to protracted liability exposure for aging aircraft, though critics argue it denies redress for latent defects emerging after 18 years.[77] In securities regulation, federal statutes incorporate repose provisions to limit indefinite exposure for issuers and underwriters. Under Section 13 of the Securities Act of 1933, claims for material misstatements or omissions in registration statements (Section 11) or prospectuses (Section 12(a)(2)) must commence within three years after the security's sale or offering date, irrespective of discovery—a repose period not subject to equitable tolling or class action suspension under American Pipe & Construction Co. v. Utah (1974).[78][79] The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 extended repose to five years for certain claims under Sections 9(e) and 18(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, balancing investor protection against perpetual liability amid long-tail fraud schemes.[80] These fixed outer limits reflect congressional intent to promote capital market stability by capping litigation risks, as affirmed in California Public Employees' Retirement System v. ANZ Securities, Inc. (2017), where the Supreme Court rejected tolling extensions.[79] Environmental contamination claims occasionally invoke state statutes of repose, particularly those tied to improvements on real property, where actions for trespass, nuisance, or property damage must be filed within a fixed period—often 6 to 12 years—from project completion, regardless of injury manifestation.[20] In CTS Corp. v. Waldburger (2014), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) does not preempt such state repose laws for toxic tort suits, distinguishing repose's substantive cutoff of the right to sue from CERCLA's discovery-based limitations extensions under Section 107.[81] This preserves state-level economic incentives for development while potentially barring claims for groundwater pollution discovered decades later, as in North Carolina's 10-year repose applied to off-site contamination impacts on land values.[82] Empirical analyses suggest these provisions mitigate indefinite liability for historical industrial activities but raise equity concerns for unaware plaintiffs, with no uniform federal repose overriding state variations in this domain.[83]Jurisdictional Variations
Variations Across US States
Statutes of repose in the United States differ markedly across states, with variations in whether they apply to specific liability fields, the length of the repose period, and the triggering event, such as substantial completion for construction or date of sale for products. All states maintain some repose provisions, but coverage is selective; for example, only 19 states enact repose for products liability, often 10 to 15 years from manufacture or delivery, while states like Alabama, Alaska, and California lack such measures.[48][84] In construction and improvements to real property, 46 states impose repose, typically 6 to 10 years from substantial completion or acceptance, though ranges extend from 4 years in Tennessee to 20 years in Maryland for non-professionals. New York and Vermont stand out for lacking dedicated construction repose statutes, relying instead on limitations periods or notice requirements after 10 years. Triggering events vary, with extensions possible in states like Arizona (1 year if defect discovered in the final year) or Colorado (2 years if in the last two years).[48][9] Medical malpractice repose is rarer, confined to a minority of states with absolute outer limits beyond discovery-based statutes of limitations; examples include 10 years from the act in Texas and Missouri, 7 years in Pennsylvania, and 5 years in Wisconsin. Most states forgo repose here, applying instead limitations of 2 to 3 years from injury or discovery.[48][85] Recent legislative trends in some states reflect efforts to shorten repose periods to curb litigation, such as Florida's reduction for construction to 7 years post-2023 amendments.[48]| State | Construction Repose | Products Repose | Medical Repose |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alabama | 7 years from substantial completion | None | None |
| Colorado | 6-7 years from substantial completion | 7 years from first sale | None |
| Florida | 10 years (7 years after 2023) | 12 years (up to 20 for fraud) | None |
| Texas | 10 years from substantial completion | 15 years from sale | 10 years from act |
| Wisconsin | 7 years from substantial completion | 15 years from manufacture (strict liability only) | 5 years from act |