Indiana Discovery Rule Not Intended to Toll SOL Until Optimal Litigation Conditions are Established
In Rieth-Riley v. Gibson et al., 923 N.E.2d 472 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010), the Indiana Court of Appeals held the trial court erred when it applied the discovery rule to toll the statute of limitations for the injury victim to file his amended complaint. The injury victim was involved in a motor vehicle accident and brought suit against the other driver. Through discovery and after the two-year statute of limitations had run, plaintiff found out the driver was working at the time of accident. He then amended his complaint to add the employer arguing the discovery rule tolled the statute of limitations.
In declining to apply the discovery rule and barring the claim against the employer, the court stated “the discovery rule is not intended to toll the limitation period until optimal litigation conditions can be established” and held it declines “to extend the discovery rule to apply to cases like this one where the indeterminate fact is not the existence of an injury, but rather the identity of a tortfeasor.”
