"As in physics, two solid bodies cannot occupy the same space at the same time, so in law and common sense, there cannot be an express and an implied contract for the same thing, existing at the same time." Rives v. Ishee, 335 So.3d 1098, 1103 (¶26) (Miss. Ct. App. 2022) (quoting Redd v. L &A Contracting Co., 246 Miss. 548, 556, 151 So.2d 205, 208 (1963)).

Furthermore, "two solid bodies cannot occupy the same space at the same time, so in law and common sense, there cannot be an express and an implied contract for the same thing, existing at the same time." Id. (internal quotation mark omitted) (quoting Rives v. Ishee, 335 So.3d 1098, 1103 (Miss. Ct. App. 2022)).

We have previously recognized that "[c]auses of action for breach of contract are subject to the three-year statute of limitations." Rives v. Ishee, 335 So. 3d 1098, 1101 (¶13) (Miss. Ct. App. 2022). "[I]f the claim is one that ‘involves latent injury,’ then ‘the cause of action does not accrue until the plaintiff has discovered, or by reasonable diligence should have discovered, the injury.’ "

William's claims for damages are all subject to the three-year catch-all statute of limitations, Miss. Code Ann. § 15-1-49. See, e.g. , Hughes v. Shipp , 324 So. 3d 286, 291 (¶14) (Miss. 2021) (stating that section 15-1-49 applies to claims for unjust enrichment); GEICO Cas. Co. v. Stapleton , 315 So. 3d 464, 468 (¶12) (Miss. 2021) (same as to claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress); Covington Cnty. Bank v. Magee , 177 So. 3d 826, 828 (¶6) (Miss. 2015) (same as to conversion claims); Rives v. Ishee , 335 So. 3d 1098, 1101 (¶13) (Miss. Ct. App. 2022) (same as to claims for breach of contract); Johnson Trucking Co. v. Peterbilt of Miss. Inc. , 149 So. 3d 536, 539 (¶10) (Miss. Ct. App. 2014) (same as to claims for breach of fiduciary duty and fraud). ¶19. Under section 15-1-49, "actions ... shall be commenced within three (3) years next after the cause of such action accrued, and not after."