Ark. Code Ann. » Title 4 Chapter 75
Arkansas Code Annotated

Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-320 (2026)

Statute of limitations

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaArk. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
  1. Any action brought by the Attorney General pursuant to this subchapter is barred if it is not commenced within five (5) years after the cause of action accrues.
  2. The foregoing statute of limitations shall be tolled during any period when the defendant in any action fraudulently conceals the events upon which the cause of action is based.
  3. This section is not intended to allow for the commencement of any action by the Attorney General under the provisions of this subchapter for events occurring prior to the enactment of this section of which the Attorney General had actual knowledge.

History. Acts 2003, No. 1172, § 1.

Research References

ALR.

Right of Retail Buyer of Price-Fixed Product to Sue Manufacturer on State Antitrust Claim. 35 A.L.R.6th 245.

Subchapter 4 — Automobile Dealer's Anti-Coercion Act

Effective Dates. Acts 1937, No. 205, § 16: effective on passage.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 2004–2016 · leading case: State v. LG Elec., Inc., 375 P.3d 636 (Wash. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. LG Elec., Inc., 375 P.3d 636 (Wash. 2016). “But see Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-320 (five years); Haw.”
California v. Infineon Tech. AG, 531 F. Supp. 2d 1124 (N.D. Cal. 2007). “” See Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-320 (e). Thus, as plaintiffs argue, a fair reading of the amended statute is that it applies to actions commenced by the Attorney General that allege conduct occurring prior to April 8, 2003, but only where the Attorney General had no actual knowledge…”
In re Relafen Antitrust Litig., 225 F.R.D. 14 (D. Mass. 2004). “§ 4-75-320(c) (“This section is not intended to allow for the commencement of any action by the Attorney General under the provisions of this *27 subchapter for events occurring prior to the enactment of this section of which the Attorney General had actual knowledge.”
In Re Tft-Lcd (Flat Panel) Antitrust Litig., 787 F. Supp. 2d 1036 (N.D. Cal. 2011). “" See Ark.Code Ann. § 4-75-320(c). Thus, as plaintiffs argue, a fair reading of the amended statute is that it applies to actions commenced by the Attorney General that allege conduct occurring prior to April 8, 2003, but only where the Attorney General had no actual knowledge…”
Missouri v. Au Optronics Corp., 787 F. Supp. 2d 1036 (N.D. Cal. 2011). “” See Ark.Code Ann. § 4-75-320(c). Thus, as plaintiffs argue, a fan-reading of the amended statute is that it applies to actions commenced by the Attorney General that allege conduct occurring prior to April 8, 2003, but only where the Attorney General had no actual knowledge of…”
— Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-320(c) — 3 cases
In re Relafen Antitrust Litig., 225 F.R.D. 14 (D. Mass. 2004). “§ 4-75-320(c) (“This section is not intended to allow for the commencement of any action by the Attorney General under the provisions of this *27 subchapter for events occurring prior to the enactment of this section of which the Attorney General had actual knowledge.”
In Re Tft-Lcd (Flat Panel) Antitrust Litig., 787 F. Supp. 2d 1036 (N.D. Cal. 2011). “" See Ark.Code Ann. § 4-75-320(c). Thus, as plaintiffs argue, a fair reading of the amended statute is that it applies to actions commenced by the Attorney General that allege conduct occurring prior to April 8, 2003, but only where the Attorney General had no actual knowledge…”
Missouri v. Au Optronics Corp., 787 F. Supp. 2d 1036 (N.D. Cal. 2011). “” See Ark.Code Ann. § 4-75-320(c). Thus, as plaintiffs argue, a fan-reading of the amended statute is that it applies to actions commenced by the Attorney General that allege conduct occurring prior to April 8, 2003, but only where the Attorney General had no actual knowledge of…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.