Opinion ID: 2567660
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Statutory Tolling Provision

Text: ¶34 While the statute of limitations for fraud found in Utah Code section 78-12-26(3) contains a statutory tolling provision, the statute of limitations for breach of fiduciary duty found in Utah Code section 78-12-25(3) does not. [24] Utah Code section 78-12-26(3) requires that a cause of action for fraud must be brought within three years, except that the cause of action in such case does not accrue until the discovery by the aggrieved party of the facts constituting the fraud. [25] We explained the application of the statutory discovery rule for fraud claims in Russell Packard Development, Inc. v. Carson: [W]hen a plaintiff first has actual or constructive knowledge of the relevant facts forming the basis of the cause of actionthe statutory limitations period begins to run and a plaintiff who desires to file a claim must do so within the time specified in the statute. Otherwise, the claim will be barred. [26] ¶35 Considering that the Parents continued to exercise control as owners of the Property following the conveyance, it is certainly plausible that they did not discover the facts forming the basis of their fraud claim immediately after the 1982 and 1983 conveyances. However, the Parents were aware of those facts by 1991 when they asked Richard to return the Property so that they could donate it. If not then, they were indisputably aware by the time they wrote a letter to Richard dated January 15, 1993, demanding that Richard sign deeds conveying the Property back to the Parents by February 15 of that year and stating: Richard, whatever your decision on February 15th, let's have it, either give us your signature as we have asked on the enclosed form, or go about your way of ignoring us. We will then know how to proceed in either event of your choice. The Parents did not file an action until eight years later in 2001. The statutory discovery provision does not toll the statute of limitations in this case because the Parents were aware of the facts constituting the alleged fraud.