Legal Opinion

Omni-Food & Fashion, Inc. v. Smith

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided September 21, 1988No. 87-1116PublishedCited by 94 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSweeney, J.

In Skidmore & Hall, supra, this court adopted the “discovery rule” for determining the accrual date for legal malpractice actions to the exclusion of any other standard. However, based on the logic, reasoning and fairness inherent in our recent pronouncement in Frysinger v. Leech (1987), 32 Ohio St. 3d 38, 512 N.E. 2d 337, which modified the accrual date of the statute of limitations set forth in R.C. 2305.11(A) for medical malpractice claims, this court is of the opinion that a similar modified rule should be established for claims sounding in legal malpractice.

R.C. 2305.11(A) states in…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Oliver v. Kaiser Community Health FoundationOhio Supreme Court · 1983
  2. Frysinger v. LeechOhio Supreme Court · 1987
  3. Hershberger v. Akron City HospitalOhio Supreme Court · 1987
  4. Wyler v. TripiOhio Supreme Court · 1971
  5. Keaton Co. v. KolbyOhio Supreme Court · 1971

3Cited by94 opinions

  1. Zimmie v. Calfee, Halter & GriswoldOhio Supreme Court · 1989
  2. Harris v. ListonOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  3. Smith v. ConleyOhio Supreme Court · 2006
  4. Jones v. Hyatt Legal Services (In Re Dow)United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Ohio · 1991
  5. R.D.H. Communications, Ltd. v. WinstonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1997

89 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