Hess v. Philip Morris USA, Inc.

Summary

The Florida Supreme Court held that the twelve-year statute of repose for fraud claims under section 95.031(2), Florida Statutes, runs from the defendant’s last act or omission constituting the fraud, not from the plaintiff’s detrimental reliance. In Engle-progeny tobacco litigation, the Phase I jury’s finding that the defendants committed fraudulent concealment after May 5, 1982, precludes them from asserting the statute of repose defense, and plaintiffs need not prove reliance within the repose period. The decision quashes the Fourth District’s contrary ruling and approves the Third District’s holding in Frazier, resolving a conflict among Florida district courts.

Holdings

1. The defendant's last act or omission triggers Florida's fraud statute of repose; it is not necessary that the smoker relied during the twelve-year repose period. Therefore, the fraudulent concealment claim is not barred if there is evidence of the defendant's wrongful conduct within the repose period.

Questions Presented

1. Whether an Engle-progeny plaintiff's fraudulent concealment claim is barred by section 95.031(2), Florida Statutes, the statute of repose for fraud claims, because the jury found no evidence of the smoker's reliance within the twelve-year repose period.

Disposition

quashed