Replyto the student's case posting by going to the hyperlink they posted and state if this is a criminal law case or a civil law case.

The Student Response: Lott v. Haley

https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1435327644960112485&q=Statute+of+limitations&hl=en&as_sdt=4,19

In 1977 Mr. Lott filed a lawsuit against his former doctor, Dr. Haley and his malpractice insurance company. Mr. Lott was a commercial diver and in 1974 Dr. Haley deemed him medically fit to dive. In 1976 another doctor deemed Lott unfit to dive an diagnosed him with an occupational illness that he had since prior to his evaluation by Dr. Haley. Lott sued for damages and his initial suit was dismissed on the grounds that too much time had passed since the missed diagnosis. Lott appealed to the Louisiana Supreme Court on the grounds that the law on statute of limitations changed between his missed diagnosis and his actual diagnosis. Under the law in place at the time of the missed diagnosis Mr. Lott would have filed in a timely manner. The court agreed and did not retroactively apply the new law to this case-stating that retroactively applying the new law did not allow Mr. Lott a reasonable timeframe in which to file following his diagnosis.