Lewis v. Gupta

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that each alleged defamatory statement constitutes a distinct cause of action
• refusing to retroactively apply tolling statute that went into effect after statute of limitations had expired
• refusing to retroactively apply tolling statute that went into effect after statute of limitations had expired.
• “[R]epeated defamations do not constitute a continuing tort; rather, . . . each separate defamatory statement itself constitutes a separate and distinct cause of action.”
• “The Fourth Circuit, in Almond... , and in a long series of unpublished opinions following Almond, has repeatedly held that Virginia’s tolling statute does not toll statutes of limitations during a potential plaintiff's period of incarceration.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).