Sharkey v. Barber
Court of Appeals of Mississippi
1Opinion of the Court
ISHEE, J.,
for the Court:
¶ 1. Under section 15-l-49(2)’s discovery rule, in actions “involvpng] latent injury or disease, the cause of action does not accrue *1246until the plaintiff `has discovered, or by reasonable diligence should have discovered, the injury."1 But this provision only applies to "actions for which no other period of limitation is prescribed[.]"2 Here, the three causes of action Chris Starkey asserted against Frank Barber were intentional torts, subject to section 15-1--35's prescribed one-year limitation period.3 So seôtion 15.-1-49(2)'s discovery rule did not apply.4 Instead,…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Scaggs v. GPCH-GP, INC.Mississippi Supreme Court · 2006
- Robinson v. CobbMississippi Supreme Court · 2000
- Staheli v. SmithMississippi Supreme Court · 1989
- Jones v. FLUOR DANIEL SERVICES CORP.Mississippi Supreme Court · 2010
- Charlie Raddin v. Manchester Educational Foundation, Inc.Mississippi Supreme Court · 2015
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Charles Bradley Carson v. Kimberly (Carson) Linley and Jay Howard HurdleMississippi Supreme Court · 2020
- Higginbotham Insurance Agency, Inc. v. Joshua R. Smith and Ross & Yerger Insurance Inc.District Court, S.D. Mississippi · 2026
- Intent Performance LLC v. Intent Sports & Fitness, LLCDistrict Court, S.D. Mississippi · 2025