In Holman v. Hansen (1989), 237 Mont. 198, 202, 773 P.2d 1200, the Montana Supreme Court stated that "The party asserting fraud is put on inquiry notice of the other party's misdeeds, and must exercise ordinary diligence to discover the facts constituting the fraud...Mere ignorance of the facts will not suffice to toll the statute of limitations." Fraudulent concealment is defined as "'the employment of artifice, planned to prevent inquiry or escape investigation, and mislead or hinder acquisition of information disclosing a right of action.'" Holman, 237 Mont. at 202. Fraudulent conveyance "requires a showing of affirmative conduct by the defendant calculated to obscure the existence of the cause of action." Holman, 237 Mont. at 202. Whether there has been a discovery of facts or whether the plaintiff should have recovered facts by the use of her senses constituting the alleged fraud more than two years before the filing of the lawsuit is a question of law. Holman, 237 Mont. at 203. In Holman the court looked to the plaintiff's experience and skill pertaining to the matters he claims were fraudulently concealed.