Where there is much uncertainty about the facts, the issue of discovering the injury could not be determined as a matter of law by the court.

This is a medical malpractice matter that involved the issue of whether the statute of limitations was tolled by the discovery rule.

The plaintiff alleged that she was misdiagnosed with sarcoidosis and the misdiagnosis delayed her cancer diagnosis and limited her treatment options. The defendants filed a motion for summary judgment on the basis that the claims were barred by the statute of limitations. The motion was initially denied but was subsequently granted upon motion for reconsideration. The plaintiff appealed. Upon appeal, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania disagreed with the trial court. The court explained that the medical records, and the patient’s own history, were unclear as to what diagnoses she was given and exactly what was communicated to her. Therefore, the court noted that where there is much uncertainty about what the facts were, the issue of discovering the injury could not be determined as a matter of law by the court. A genuine issue of material fact existed as to when the patient, through the exercise of due diligence, knew or should have known that she had been diagnosed with sarcoidosis.

^{Case Law Alerts, 4th Quarter, October 2022 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. Copyright © 2022 Marshall Dennehey, all rights reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm.}