In recognition of these goals, the courts have traditionally held that an action begins to accrue immediately upon the infliction or occurrence of injury, regardless of a failure by the plaintiff to discover his cause of action. * The purpose of statutes of limitations is to promote stability and to avoid the burdens of defending stale claims. However, this decision was outdated and the court felt it was time to re-examine its past holdings. Austin,, the Court held that the failure to discover the existence of a cause of action did not prevent the running of the statute of limitations.
Was the trial court correct in holding that the cause of action accrues when the injury occurs, so as to begin the running of the statute of limitations? The Defendant pleaded the statute of limitations in his answer. This suit was initiated over three years after the operation, but approximately eleven months after discovering the pregnancy. Plaintiff initiated a malpractice suit, alleging that the Defendant’s previous surgery was negligently performed.
On March 9, 1973, Plaintiff delivered a premature child, with severe complications. On Jthe Plaintiff underwent surgery at the advice of her doctor to prevent future pregnancy. Philadelphia Board of Public Education 453 Pa.
0 kommentar(er)
