Opinion
No. 2013AP611.
2013-12-19
Lane M. McINTYRE, Christopher McIntyre and Estate of Marilyn McIntyre, Plaintiffs–Appellants, v. Curtis E. FORBES and Debra J. Forbes, Defendants–Respondents.
Pritzlaff v. Archdiocese of Milwaukee, 194 Wis.2d 302, 315–16, 533 N.W.2d 780 (1995) (citations omitted). Reasonable diligence in this context “means such diligence as the great majority of persons would use in the same or similar circumstances.” Spitler v. Dean, 148 Wis.2d 630, 638, 436 N.W.2d 308 (1989). A potential plaintiff “may not close [his or her] eyes to means of information reasonably accessible to [him or her] and must in good faith apply [his or her] attention to those particulars which may be inferred to be within [his or her] reach.” Id. Under the discovery rule, once a plaintiff, acting with reasonable diligence, knows or should have known the injury and the identity of the responsible party “to a reasonable probability,” the statute of limitations period is triggered. Borello v. U.S. Oil Co., 130 Wis.2d 397, 420, 388 N.W.2d 140 (1986).