Discovery Rule

A rule that expands the statute of limitations, such that the time period during which a lawsuit may be initiated begins from the moment the victim of the tort or plaintiff becomes aware of the act of alleged malpractice
Mentioned in ?
References in periodicals archive ?
While I briefly considered the evaluation of the choice of law problem facing state courts under state RICO statutes without special statutes of limitation and an evaluation of the two individual accrual rules already rejected by the Court, they merit a more extensive review at this point against the backdrop of either the pure Clayton Act or injury-occurrence rule or a modified (separate accrual) discovery rule.
In fact, the court was torn between following precedent and following the rationale for an exception to the statute of limitations much like the discovery rule wherein the statute of limitations does not begin to run until a patient knew or should have known that he or she had foreign object had been negligently left in their body.
Many of the United States Courts of Appeals use the discovery rule in non-malpractice cases "where plaintiffs face comparable problems in discerning the fact and cause of their injuries.
As the court explained, "Under Indiana's discovery rule .
The latter approach--using the inevitable discovery rule to save evidence discovered during a search that is otherwise illegal under Gant--was utilized by the Ninth Circuit in United States v.
It was argued that the statute "not only corresponds with the basic one year prescriptive period for dialectical actions provided in Louisiana Law |but also| embodies the discovery rule delineated as the fourth category of contra non valentium.
The discovery rule can be limited or eliminated by contract, however, there is no reason not to negotiate for substantial completion as the trigger of the statute of limitations.
that possibility, but only because it grafted a discovery rule onto
The discovery rule can prolong for several years the running of an otherwise short statute of limitations.
198) The Supreme Court has never reviewed a claim that a restrictive discovery rule violates the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel.
The unanimous court said the delayed discovery rule provides a balance between the rights of the insurer and the policyholder.
Typical language is found in Illinois Supreme Court Rule 415: When the court learns that a party has violated a discovery rule, "the court may order such party to permit the discovery of material and information not previously disclosed, grant a continuance, exclude such evidence, or enter such other order as it deems just under the circumstances.