Legal Definitions - discovered-peril doctrine

The discovered-peril doctrine is another name for the last-clear-chance doctrine. This legal principle serves as an exception to the traditional rule of contributory negligence, which historically barred a plaintiff from recovering damages if their own negligence contributed in any way to their injury.

Under the discovered-peril doctrine, even if a plaintiff was negligent and put themselves in a position of danger, the defendant can still be held liable for the plaintiff's injuries if the defendant had the "last clear chance" to avoid the accident but failed to do so. This applies when the defendant knew, or reasonably should have known, of the plaintiff's peril and had a reasonable opportunity to prevent the harm.

Here are some examples illustrating the discovered-peril doctrine:

• Example 1: Vehicle Accident with a Distracted Pedestrian

  Imagine a pedestrian is crossing a busy street against a "Don't Walk" signal, engrossed in their phone and not paying attention to traffic. A driver approaching the intersection sees the pedestrian's dangerous situation from a significant distance, giving them ample time to slow down, honk, or even swerve slightly to avoid a collision. However, the driver, perhaps distracted themselves or simply careless, fails to take any evasive action and hits the pedestrian. While the pedestrian was initially negligent by crossing against the light, the driver had the "last clear chance" to prevent the accident after discovering the pedestrian's peril. In this scenario, the discovered-peril doctrine might allow the pedestrian to recover damages from the driver, despite their own initial fault.

• Example 2: Industrial Incident on a Construction Site

  Consider a construction worker who, against safety protocols, momentarily steps into a restricted zone directly beneath a crane's path to retrieve a dropped tool. The crane operator, from their elevated position, clearly sees the worker enter the dangerous area and has several seconds to stop the crane's descent or sound a warning siren. Despite seeing the worker, the operator negligently continues the operation, and the worker is injured by falling debris. Although the worker was negligent by entering the restricted zone, the crane operator had the "last clear chance" to prevent the injury after becoming aware of the worker's perilous position. The doctrine could hold the crane operator (or their employer) liable.

• Example 3: Train Incident with a Trespasser

  Suppose an individual is negligently walking along active train tracks, a prohibited area. A train engineer spots the individual on the tracks from a long distance away, providing sufficient time to engage the emergency brakes and sound the horn repeatedly to alert the trespasser. However, due to the engineer's inattention, they fail to react until it's too late, and the train strikes the individual. Even though the individual was trespassing and thus negligent, the train engineer had the "last clear chance" to avoid the collision once they discovered the individual's peril. The discovered-peril doctrine could be applied to assign liability to the railroad company, despite the trespasser's initial negligence.