Legal Opinion

Zimmie v. Calfee, Halter & Griswold

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided May 17, 1989No. 88-314PublishedCited by 168 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDouglas, J.

The sole question in this appeal is whether appellant’s legal malpractice action against his attorneys, the appellees, was barred by Ohio’s one-year statute of limitations.

The statute of limitations applicable to legal malpractice actions is set forth in R.C. 2305.11(A) which stated, at the time of the commencement of the action herein, in relevant part: “[a]n action for * * * malpractice *57* * * shall be brought within one year after • the cause thereof accrued * * * ”2

In 1983, this court adopted the “discovery rule” as defining the date upon which a cause of action accrues and the statute of…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Oliver v. Kaiser Community Health FoundationOhio Supreme Court · 1983
  2. Omni-Food & Fashion, Inc. v. SmithOhio Supreme Court · 1988
  3. Allenius v. ThomasOhio Supreme Court · 1989
  4. Hershberger v. Akron City HospitalOhio Supreme Court · 1987
  5. Skidmore & Hall v. RottmanOhio Supreme Court · 1983

3Cited by168 opinions

  1. Hughes v. Mahaney & HigginsTexas Supreme Court · 1992
  2. Laird v. BlackerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
  3. Investors REIT One v. JacobsOhio Supreme Court · 1989
  4. Natl. Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, PA v. WuerthOhio Supreme Court · 2009
  5. Collins v. SotkaOhio Supreme Court · 1998

163 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API