The traditional rule for conflicts statutes of limitation is that the forum applies its own limitation period. In 1983, Washington adopted the Uniform Conflict of Laws-Limitations Act (the "Uniform Act") and is now one of six states to have adopted the Uniform Act. The Uniform Act represents the culmination of years of independent judicial and legislative attempts to change the traditional rule so as to provide some rational basis for the application of a particular statute of limitation in a given case. However, the Uniform Act presents some interpretive difficulties with respect to the question of which state's law forms the "substantive base" for a particular claim, and for this reason courts have struggled to apply the Uniform Act in a consistent manner. This Comment discusses some of the interpretive problems facing the courts and advocates an approach that differentiates between the law which invokes the statute of limitation and the law which governs peripheral substantive issues. Under an approach which focuses on the law that invokes a particular statute of limitation, the Uniform Act will be applied in a manner which furthers its purpose and maintains uniformity in treatment of conflicts between statutes of limitation.
Christopher R. Stanton,
Notes and Comments,
Implementing the Uniform Conflict of Laws-Limitations Act in Washington,
71 Wash. L. Rev.
Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/wlr/vol71/iss3/9