California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Mireskandari v. Associated Newspapers Ltd., B262942 (Cal. App. 2016):
Thus, the statute of limitations begins to run " 'when the plaintiff suspects or should suspect that [his] injury was caused by wrongdoing, that someone has done something wrong to [him]. . . . [T]he limitations period begins once the plaintiff " ' "has notice or information of circumstances to put a reasonable person on inquiry . . . ." ' " . . . A plaintiff need not be aware of the specific "facts" necessary to establish the claim; that is a process contemplated by pretrial discovery. Once the plaintiff has a suspicion of wrongdoing, and therefore an incentive to sue, [he] must decide whether to file suit or sit on [his] rights. So long as a suspicion exists, it is clear that the plaintiff must go find the facts; [he] cannot wait for the facts to find [him].' [Citation.]" (Goldrich v. Natural Y Surgical Specialties, Inc. (1994) 25 Cal.App.4th 772, 779; see also Cain v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (1976) 62 Cal.App.3d 310, 314-315 [discovery rule applies to cause of action for invasion of privacy].)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.