Whether fraudulent concealment tolled plaintiff’s claims; MCL 600.5855; Mays v Snyder

The court held that the trial court did not err by granting defendants-police officers summary disposition of plaintiff-truck driver’s claims. Plaintiff was driving his truck when he was involved in a pileup accident during a snowstorm. Defendants investigated the accident and believed plaintiff was responsible for the deaths of two children in the accident. His commercial driver’s license was revoked, a warrant request was submitted seeking manslaughter charges (the prosecutor declined to bring charges), and he was sued civilly. Plaintiff eventually sued defendants for defamation, gross negligence and intentional infliction of emotional distress, civil conspiracy, and fraudulent concealment. The trial court granted summary disposition for defendants. On appeal, the court rejected plaintiff’s argument that the trial court erred by granting summary disposition for defendants on the basis that the fraudulent concealment rule tolled the applicable statutes of limitations for his claims. “Fatal to plaintiff’s argument . . . is the evidence in the record demonstrating that, as early as 2015 or as late as 2017, plaintiff knew or should have known of defendants’ mishandling of” two sets of paint samples. “[T]he record demonstrates that plaintiff . . . knew or should have known about his causes of action against defendants by September 2017 at the latest, meaning that plaintiff would have needed to file a complaint by September 2019. Accordingly, plaintiff’s complaint filed in 2021 was barred by the applicable statutes of limitations . . . .” Affirmed.