In Rodrigue v. VALCO Enterprises, Inc., 169 Vt. 539, 726 A.2d 61 (1999), the plaintiff was injured by a drunk driver who had allegedly been overserved at the defendant's establishment. Plaintiff argued that his case did not accrue until he discovered that the defendant had indeed overserved the driver. The Court rejected the plaintiff's argument: "Plaintiff reads too much into the discovery rule. It is important to keep in mind that the discovery rule seeks to establish the appropriate time from which to commence the running of the limitations period. The courts must determine at what point a plaintiff had information, or should have obtained information, sufficient to put a reasonable person on notice that a particular defendant may have been liable for the plaintiff's injuries." (Id. at , 726 A.2d at 63.)