In the Wallace v. Kato Supreme Court case Wallace was suing the city of Chicago for a violation of his Fourth Amendment rights. He was falsely arrested and convicted of first degree murder in 1994, and in 1998 the Illinois Appellate Court found that the arrest happened without probable cause. In 2002 while in the process of waiting for a new trial, the prosecution dropped the case. In 2003 Wallace sued the city for unlawful arrest under section 1983 of the federal law. He wanted to be paid for damages caused by his arrest and incarceration.
At this point the city of Chicago made a motion to receive a summary judgment due to the fact that the lawsuit was under a two-year statute of limitations. According to the district court, Wallace had two years to file this lawsuit, either after the arrest in 1994 or the 1998 decision that the arrest was not valid. The court said that since both of these times had been more than two years before Wallace sued the city, they did not have to hear the case and instead granted the summary judgment.
Wallace appealed, and the United States Court of Appeals ruled that the statute of limitations began at the time of the arrest. Wallace took the case to the Supreme Court. They also ruled that the time period for the statute of limitations begins at the time of the arrest. Statute of limitation time frames vary by state, but begin at the time of arrest according to this ruling.
Click here to learn more about Thomas Stagg of Simmons, Jannace & Stagg