A. McD. v. Rosen

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that discovery rule may apply to toll the statute of limitations “[i]n those circumstances where the plaintiff cannot reasonably be expected to be aware of the injury or of its cause”
• reasoning that including “plaintiff’s mental incapacity as a factor to be considered in determining the reasonableness of plaintiffs diligence runs counter to [the reasonable person standard]”
• noting “[t]he standard of reasonable diligence is an objective or external one that is the same for all individuals. It is not a subjective standard”
• granting summary judgment on patient's malpractice claim against her psychiatrist for sexual misconduct because the evidence suggested plaintiff was “in possession of the salient facts regarding her alleged mistreatment and the persons responsible therefor”
• setting the point of accrual at plaintiff’s termination of her relationship with an abusive therapist because “there no longer were any facts that could not have been discerned by the exercise of reasonable diligence”
• plaintiffs mental incapacity will not be considered in assessing diligence

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).