Mo. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 513
Missouri Revised Statutes

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 513.630 (2026)

Statute of limitations

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MO-REVrevisor.mo.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

  513.630.  Statute of limitations. — Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a proceeding under this act* may be commenced up until five years after the conduct terminates or the cause of action accrues.  If a criminal prosecution or civil action is brought by the state relating to conduct which would constitute criminal activity as defined in section 513.605, then the running of the period  of limitations shall be suspended during the pendency of such prosecution or action by the state and for five years thereafter.

­­--------

(L. 1986 S.B. 450 § 13)

Effective 3-17-86

*"This act" (S.B. 450, 1986) contained numerous sections.  Consult Disposition of Sections table for a definitive listing.

(2002) Special statute of limitations does not apply to any causes of action for recovery of property wrongfully taken other than forfeiture actions under the Criminal Activity Forfeiture Act. Yahne v. Pettis County Sheriff Dept., 73 S.W.3d 717 (Mo.App.W.D.).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1991–2013 · leading case: Yahne v. Pettis Cnty. Sheriff Dep't, 73 S.W.3d 717 (Mo. Ct. App. 2002).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Yahne v. Pettis Cnty. Sheriff Dep't, 73 S.W.3d 717 (Mo. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 16× “1 In a case of first impression we must determine whether the statute of limitation contained in § 513.630 of CAFA applies to his claim for return of the money.”
Williams v. Greene Cnty. Sheriff's Dep't, 94 S.W.3d 450 (Mo. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 9× “The judgment granting the motion to dismiss included the findings: Plaintiff claims the limitation provided in § 513.630 applies. That section states: Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a proceeding under this act may be commenced up until five years after the conduct…”
State v. Residence Located at 5708 Paseo, 896 S.W.2d 532 (Mo. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 3× “This interpretation is bolstered by § 513.630, another section of CAFA. Section 513.”
State v. Eberenz, 805 S.W.2d 359 (Mo. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 3× “Section 513.630 RSMo 1986. For the following reasons we hold dismissal of Counts II, III and IV was required because the petition was late filed.”
State v. Morris, 397 S.W.3d 927 (Mo. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 6× “The summons for this action was not issued until October 2011; Appellant filed an objection to the prosecution of the forfeiture and a summary judgment motion for the reason' that the statute of limitations, section 513.630, 1 had run and the case was time-barred.”
State ex rel. MacLaughlin v. Treon, 926 S.W.2d 13 (Mo. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 2× “This interpretation is bolstered by section 513.630, another section of CAFA.”
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.