53 So. 3d 849
Miss. Ct. App.2011Background
- Odom admitted an affair with Paula, Fulkerson's wife, which ended by June 2003.
- Fulkerson learned of the affair in November 2006 and sued Odom for alienation of affection in November 2007.
- The Wayne County Circuit Court granted summary judgment to Odom, ruling the claim was time-barred by the three-year statute of limitations.
- The appellate court conducted de novo review of the summary-judgment ruling and assessed accrual and tolling rules.
- The court held that accrual occurred in June 2003 and that neither the 2006 phone call nor discovery rules toll the limitations period.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| When did the alienation-of-affection claim accrue? | Fulkerson argues accrual occurs when loss of affections is finalized. | Odom contends accrual occurred earlier or no tolled period exists. | Accrual in June 2003; final accomplishment in 2003. |
| Does the discovery rule toll accrual in latent-injury contexts here? | Discovery rule delays accrual until discovery of injury. | Discovery rule does not apply to this non-latent alienation context. | No tolling under the discovery rule. |
| Does the continuing-tort doctrine toll the statute in this case? | A continuing-tort theory could toll limitations based on ongoing conduct. | Odom ceased wrongful conduct in 2003; the 2006 call is too remote to toll. | No continuing-tort toll; three-year limit expired. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hancock v. Watson, 962 So.2d 627 (Miss.Ct.App.2007) (accrual based on final accomplishment of alienation, not on spouse's loss)
- Carr v. Carr, 784 So.2d 227 (Miss.Ct.App.2000) (statutory framework for accrual in some contexts)
- Bland v. Hill, 735 So.2d 414 (Miss.1999) (loss of consortium as core marital injury element)
- Saunders v. Alford, 607 So.2d 1214 (Miss.1992) (abolished criminal-conversation notion; alienation framework)
- P.P.G. Architectural Finishes v. Lowery, 909 So.2d 47 (Miss.2005) (latent-injury concept and discovery-rule interpretation)
- Donald v. Amoco Prod. Co., 735 So.2d 161 (Miss.1999) (latent-injury discussion underpinning discovery rule)
- Pierce v. Cook, 992 So.2d 612 (Miss.2008) (definition of continuing-tort tolling)
- Stringer, 748 So.2d 662 (Miss.1999) (statute-of-limitations policy statements)