A defendant is not confined to denials of the allegations of the complaint or petition, but is entitled to set out new matter in defense or as a basis for affirmative relief. Any complaint or petition for relief in a court must be filed within the statutory time limit (Statute of Limitations). These statutes vary from state to state.
This form is a generic example of an answer and affirmative defense that may be referred to when preparing such a pleading for your particular state.
Hawaii Answer by Defendant in a Civil Lawsuit Alleging the Affirmative Defense of the Cause of Action being Barred by the Appropriate Statute of Limitations In civil litigation, including cases filed in Hawaii, the defendant has the opportunity to file an answer to the plaintiff's complaint. One potential affirmative defense that the defendant may raise is the statute of limitations defense, which argues that the plaintiff's cause of action is barred due to the expiration of the time period specified by the relevant statute. A statute of limitations is a legal time limit imposed on the filing of a lawsuit, specifying the period during which a plaintiff must bring a claim against a defendant. Failure to file within this time frame may prevent or bar the plaintiff from pursuing the claim. Should a defendant choose to assert the affirmative defense of the statute of limitations, they are essentially arguing that the applicable time limit has expired, and therefore the lawsuit should be dismissed. In Hawaii, there are different types of answers a defendant can file when asserting the affirmative defense of the cause of action being barred by the appropriate statute of limitations. These include: 1. General Denial Answer: The defendant may submit a general denial answer, where they deny each and every allegation made by the plaintiff. Alongside this denial, the defendant can raise the affirmative defense of the statute of limitations, contending that the plaintiff's cause of action is barred due to the expiration of the prescribed time period. 2. Specific Statute of Limitations Answer: Alternatively, the defendant may choose to file an answer specifically addressing the statute of limitations defense. In this type of answer, the defendant provides a detailed argument stating why the plaintiff's claim should be dismissed due to the expiration of the applicable time limit. This may involve citing relevant statutes, case law, or other legal precedents to support their position. 3. Supplemental Answer: In some instances, a defendant may need to file a supplemental answer if they discover additional facts or evidence supporting their defense of the statute of limitations after filing their initial answer. This allows the defendant to present new information that further strengthens their argument for the dismissal of the plaintiff's claim. When crafting an answer that raises the affirmative defense of the cause of action being barred by the appropriate statute of limitations, careful consideration of Hawaii's specific laws and regulations is essential. Each jurisdiction has its own set of statutes and time limits governing various types of claims, and defendants must ensure that they properly assert their defense in accordance with Hawaii's specific legal framework. Overall, a Hawaii answer by the defendant in a civil lawsuit alleging the affirmative defense of the cause of action being barred by the appropriate statute of limitations is an essential legal document that outlines the defendant's position against the plaintiff's allegations and seeks to dismiss the claim based on the expiration of the applicable time limit specified by Hawaii law.
