Contract statute of limitations

On Sep 21, 6:34 am, "Alan" <alanb_lano2s...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Los Angeles Small Claims Court makes a distinction between written and oral
> agreements for purposes of determining statute of limitations. I am a
> printer who issues an invoice upon completion of work. There is no prior
> written contract. Is an invoice generally accepted to be a written
> agreement? If not, would the sign-off that the job is okay to print
> constitute such an agreement? This form -- signed by the customer -- 
> basically says: I have looked at the job and I approve it to go to print.

My question to you is, does any of this matter to YOU?

If in doubt, why would you wait until after the earler of the 2 possible statutes expires, before filing suit?  As long as your suit is filed early enough to be timely under both interpretations, then who cares?

OTOH if you have already allowed the earlier statute to expire before you found out about this distinction, you have nothing to lose by filing suit anyway, and arguing for the interpretation that helps you.   Again, win or lose, the outcome of this discussion would have no practical influence on _your_ behavior.

So, don't hesitate any longer than you have to, and go ahead and sue if you've already made a demand for payment and it has been refused or ignored and if all the other factors one ought to consider tell you that suing is the only way you are likely to get paid and that it is worth the hassle.  Good luck,
--
This posting is for discussion purposes, not professional advice.
Anything you post on this Newsgroup is public information.
I am not your lawyer, and you are not my client in any specific legal matter.
For confidential professional advice, consult your own lawyer in a private communication.

Mike Jacobs
LAW OFFICE OF W. MICHAEL JACOBS
10440 Little Patuxent Pkwy #300
Columbia, MD 21044
(tel) 410-740-5685      (fax) 410-740-4300