Other Injuries: Confusion About the Term "Insanity" in Reason to Tolling Statute of Limitations

Question about tolling in Michigan-Insanity Rule

First off, Aaron, thanks for this discussion board. You're doing more good than you will ever know!

Two-fold question:

At this Website, https://www.expertlaw.com/library/li...of-limitations

You write:
"in addition to late discovery, it may be possible to avoid the harsh result of a statute of limitation by arguing that the statute has been "tolled". When it is said that a statute is "tolled", it means that something has stopped the statute from running for a period of time. Typical reasons for tolling a statute of limitations include... mental incompetence (the victim of the injury was not mentally competent at the time the injury occurred)...

What you wrote is different from what the Michigan Statute reads, when it comes to the use of the phrase, "Mental Incompetetence."

Instead of "mental incompetence," The State of Michigan Statute 600.5851 uses the term INSANE. (here):

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(mw0...e=mcl-600-5851

600.5851

(2) The term insane as employed in this chapter means a condition of mental derangement such as to prevent the sufferer from comprehending rights he or she is otherwise bound to know...

My question is two-fold:

1) What is the difference between the meaning of "insane" and and the meaning of "mental incompetence?" Is there case law that points to these terms being identical?

2) Would a condition such as PTSD (which include symptoms like emotional numbness, avoidance and inability to remember an important aspect of the traumatic events) QUALIFY as "mental incompetence" with regard to being able to "comprehend rights he or she is otherwise bound to know"-- as required in the statute?

Again, any case law you know of?

Thanks again!

Other Injuries: Confusion About the Term "Insanity" in Reason to Tolling Statute of Limitations