Legal Memorandum: Discovery Doctrine and Fraudulent Concealment Rule

Issue: IN NEW JERSEY, WHETHER A PLAINTIFF CAN BE ESTOPPED BY APPLICATION OF THE DISCOVERY DOCTRINE AND THE FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT RULE.

In cases in which the discovery doctrine applies, a cause of action does not accrue until the would-be plaintiff discovers, or “by an exercise of reasonable diligence and intelligence should have discovered that” there may be a basis for a cause of action.  TA s "Lopez v. Swyer, 62 N.J. 267, 274 (1973)" c 0Lopez, 62 N.J. at 272.  Accord TA s "Burd v. New Jersey Tel. Co., 76 N.J. 284, 293 (1978)" c 0Burd, 76 N.J. at 293 (possible basis for cause of action consists of material facts; the plaintiff need not know for sure that there is basis for a claim).  It has been repeatedly emphasized that under New Jersey law, the only two pieces of information the plaintiff must have for a cause of action to accrue are knowledge of an injury and knowledge of fault.  TA s "Cruz v. City of Camden, 898 F. Supp. 1100, 1113 (D.N" c 1 l "Cruz v. City of Camden, 898 F. Supp. 1100 (D.N.J. 1995)"Cruz v. City of Camden, 898 F. Supp. 1100, 1113 (D.N.J. 1995) (citing TA s "Savage v. Old Bridge-Sayreville Med. Group, 134 N.J." c 1 l "Savage v. Old Bridge-Sayreville Med. Group, 134 N.J. 241 (1995)"Savage v. Old Bridge-Sayreville Med. Group, 134 N.J. 241, 246 (1995)).  Thus, the discovery rule only applies to prevent the application of the statute under one of two scenarios:  “when injured parties reasonably […]