Everyone says the clock starts running the day a medical mistake happens, but actually Oregon's discovery rule can delay the deadline until the patient knew, or reasonably should have known, that an injury may have been caused by medical care.

That matters in malpractice cases because harm is not always obvious right away. A pacemaker or defibrillator problem may look like a device failure before anyone suspects a treatment error. A patient assaulted in a psychiatric setting may not immediately realize poor supervision or hospital procedures played a role. The rule focuses on when a person had enough facts to connect the injury to possible wrongdoing, not when they finally got every answer or a doctor admitted fault.

In Oregon, this rule often works together with two hard deadlines. A medical malpractice claim is generally filed within two years of discovery, but there is also a five-year statute of repose that can cut off the claim even if the problem is discovered later. That makes timing critical in cases involving delayed diagnosis, surgical complications, or injuries that emerge after months of treatment.

The discovery rule can keep a claim alive, but it does not guarantee one. Insurers and defense lawyers often argue the patient should have figured it out sooner, which can turn medical records, follow-up visits, and second-opinion dates into major evidence.