Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Success Stories of Personal Injury Lawyers Directory US Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Canada Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Personal Injury Lawyers Resource Directory
Search Lawyers by Zip Code
facebook.com/injury.usa

  to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.

Duffy v. Kindred Healthcare

5/6/2005

injury was initially inflicted, but when the plaintiff knew or should have known that he had been injured by the conduct of the tortfeasor." Id. at 700 (quoting Louisville Trust Co. v. Johns-Manville Prods. Co., Ky., 580 S.W.2d 497, 500 (1979)).


Here, the injury resulting from Williams April 16, 2003, fall manifested itself immediately, so the discovery rule is inapplicable. In addition, as discussed further below, it does not appear that Williams was under any incompetency which would have prevented her from knowing that she was injured on April 16, 2003. We are of the opinion that the statute was not tolled by application of the discovery rule.


The limitations period was also not tolled by KRS 413.280. KRS 413.280 provides as follows:


When two (2) or more disabilities exist in the same person at the time the cause of action accrues, the limitation does not attach until they are all removed. The disabilities which Duffy alleges are suffered by Williams, and hence toll the limitations period, are blindness and ambulation. These, however, are physical disabilities unrelated to the type of "disability" referred to in KRS 413.280. The types of "disability" contemplated by KRS 413.280 are conditions which would justifiably excuse the plaintiff from filing a lawsuit because of a reduced capacity to maintain an action, as, for instance, being an infant or of unsound mind, KRS 413.170; death, KRS 413.180; absence from the state, KRS 413.190; injunction or other restraint, KRS 413.260; or citizen of enemy country, KRS 413.300.


Blindness and ambulation, while physical disabilities, are not disabilities within the meaning of the term as used in the area of limitations of action, and the statute of limitations in this case was not tolled by these physical disabilities.


For the foregoing reasons the judgment of the Fayette Circuit Court is affirmed.


ALL CONCUR.






Page 1 2 

Kentucky Personal Injury Attorneys    Personal Injury Lawyers


  to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.

Personal Injury Lawyers Brain Injuries Spinal Cord Injuries
Quadriplegia and Paraplegia Back Injuries Ruptured & Herniated Disks
Bulging Disk Neck Injuries Dog Bites
Toxic Mold Product Liability Fire Accidents
Trucking Accidents Boating Accidents Car Accidents
Plane Crashes Medical Malpractice Motorcycle Accidents
Wrongful Death Personal Injury Lawsuits Testimonial
FDP  |   RSS Feeds  |  Articles  |  Jobs  |  Leads  |  Partner Websites
DUI Defense  |  SiteMap  | PI Blog  | Trading Partners | Attorney Registration  | PI Case Laws  | FAQ | Personal Injury Forum
 | Personal Injury Lawyers Directory  | Success Stories  | Press Releases
Copyright © 2005. “National Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (NAPIL)”. All rights reserved.
By using the system, you agree to TERMS OF SERVICE