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 ?
Nor would the discovery rule open an avenue for the plaintiff, considering the policy goal of tax assessment finality that underlies the statute.
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.
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.
As the court explained, "Under Indiana's discovery rule .
1) An FTCA claim generally accrues at the time of injury, but in circumstances where either the injury or its cause is not immediately apparent, federal courts employ a discovery rule that delays accrual until the plaintiff knows or reasonably should know the factual basis of his claim.
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.
Whether the plaintiff exercised reasonable diligence as required by the Discovery Rule was a question of fact that had to be decided by a jury.
that possibility, but only because it grafted a discovery rule onto