laches
Definitions from Case Law · United States Supreme Court
Definitions from Case Law
From 327 U.S. 392 - Holmberg v. Armbrecht · 1946Most cited · 3,573 citing opinions
Laches is not, like limitation, a mere matter of time; but principally a question of the inequity of permitting the claim to be enforced,—an inequity founded upon some change in the condition or relations of the property or the parties.
How the Supreme Court has restated “laches”
Each Supreme Court definition of “laches,” sized by how often later courts cited it. “Change” is measured by wording overlap with earlier definitions — a rough signal, not a semantic judgment.
How often courts cite the cases defining “laches”
Court decisions citing the 11 opinions that defined “laches” — 7,680 in all, by decade. Counts are citations to the defining cases as a whole, not verified uses of the term. The dip in the most recent years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the latest years.
All 11 definitions, chronological · 1824–1963
- ORIGINAL
The general principle is, that laches is not imputable to the Government; and this maxim is founded, not in the notion of extraordinary prerogative, but upon a great public policy. The government can transact its business only through its agents; and its fiscal operations are so various, and its agencies so numerous and scattered, that the utmost vigilance would not save the public from the most serious losses, if the doctrine of laches can be applied to its transactions.
not imputable to government
Laches are not imputable to the government. The regulations requiring settlements to be made by its officers at short periods, are designed for the protection of the government, and merely directory to the officers, and form no part of the contract.
as applied to the government
It is the established rule in a court of equity, that the creditor who claims its aid must show that he has used reasonable diligence to recover his debt, and that the difficulties in his way at law have not been occasioned by his own neglect. A delay of twenty years is considered an absolute bar in a court of equity, unless it is satisfactorily accounted for.
in equity
courts of equity act upon their own inherent doctrine of discouraging, for the peace of society, antiquated demands, refuse to interfere where there has been gross laches in prosecuting the claim, or long acquiescence in the assertion of adverse rights. Long acquiescence and laches by parties out of possession are productive of much hardship and injustice to others, and cannot be excused but by showing some actual hindrance or impediment, caused by the fraud or concealment of the parties in possession, which will appeal to the conscience of the chancellor
laches or delay in the judicial enforcement of maritime liens will, under proper circumstances, constitute a valid defence. No arbitrary or fixed period of time has been, or will be, established as an inflexible rule, but that the delay which will defeat such a suit must in every case depend on the peculiar equitable circumstances of that case. Where the lien is to be enforced to the detriment of a purchaser for value, without notice of the lien, the defence will be held valid under shorter time, and a more rigid scrutiny of the circumstances of the delay, than when the claimant is the owner at the time the lien accrued.
We do not know on what principle we could apply the equitable doctrine of abandonment by laches in a case where the measure of reasonable promptness is fixed by statute, and no other ground appears by reason of which laches could be imputed to the applicant.
patent prosecution
the principle that equity will not aid a plaintiff whose unexcused delay, if the suit were allowed, would be prejudicial to the defendant.
Where there has been no inexcusable delay in seeking a remedy and where no prejudice to the defendant has ensued from the mere passage of time, there should be no bar to relief.
laches as a defense to an admiralty suit is not to be measured by strict application of statutes of limitations; instead, the rule is that 'the delay which will defeat such a suit must in every case depend on the peculiar equitable circumstances of that case.
admiralty
The test of laches is prejudice to the other party.