The defendants brought motions for summary judgment arguing that the plaintiffs' claims for malicious prosecution, negligent investigation, misfeasance in public office, and civil conspiracy were statute-barred.
The plaintiffs had successfully defended against both criminal and civil forfeiture applications brought by the state.
The court dismissed the summary judgment motions, finding that while the plaintiffs knew they had suffered damage when the criminal forfeiture application was dismissed, it was not legally appropriate for them to commence an action until the related civil forfeiture application and the appeal of the costs decision were finally resolved.
Therefore, the claims were brought within the two-year limitation period.
