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 ?
Walmsley], the fulcrum of the discovery rule in 10-7-2 is 'the act that caused the death rather than the actors,'" Justice Francis X.
In response, Gerald contended that his action fell within the "discovery rule" contained in 893.55(1m)(b), which allows a complaint to be brought within one year from the date a plaintiff discovered, or in the exercise of reasonable diligence should have discovered, the injury complained of.
However, Hillman also determined that the plaintiff could not benefit from the "discovery rule" to salvage claims that were more than a year old.
(28) The Van Dusen court created the 'discovery rule,' the original standard that focuses on the discovery date when determining when the statute of limitations is triggered.
California subscribes to the discovery rule, that is, a cause of action accrues only when a claimant discovers or should have discovered injury was the result of negligence.
(13) The Alaska Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the discovery rule could not be invoked to toll the statute of limitations absent expert evidence.
New Hampshire, like many states, has a discovery rule, which prevents the statute of limitations from beginning to run until the injured party knows both the existence of harm and the relationship of that harm to the other party's conduct.
Hooks argued he should get extra time to sue under the state's "discovery rule," saying that Samson's false information kept him from discovering the fraud for years.
We are back to some form of the discovery rule, which is where the circuits are now.
of limitations to conclude that the discovery rule was applicable when
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.
Here, the court recognized that Indiana follows what is called the "discovery rule." As the court explained, "Under Indiana's discovery rule ...

Full browser ?