Opinion ID: 2567660
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Exceptional Circumstance

Text: ¶36 The Parents next argue that the applicable statutes of limitations for both fraud and breach of fiduciary duty were subject to tolling under the exceptional circumstances doctrine. Under this doctrine, the limitations period is tolled `where the case presents exceptional circumstances and the application of the general rule would be irrational or unjust, regardless of any showing that the defendant . . . prevented the discovery of the cause of action.' [27] In light of the Parents' threat to pursue and apparent ability to pursue a cause of action in a timely manner and Richard's steadfast refusal to return the Property, we cannot say that the parties were in grossly unequal positions or that the application of the statutes of limitations to this case would be irrational or unjust. Moreover, [f]or this exception to apply, `an initial showing must be made that the plaintiff did not know and could not reasonably have discovered the facts underlying the cause of action in time to commence an action within [the limitations period].' [28] Once again, in light of the fact that the Parents were indisputably aware of the facts underlying their cause of action, the discovery rule does not apply in this case.