Legal Opinion

Pratte v. Stewart

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided May 5, 2010No. 2009-0953PublishedCited by 38 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtO’Connor, J.

{¶ 1} This appeal requires a determination of the appropriate statute of limitations for a claim resulting from childhood sexual abuse in which the claimant alleges that memories of the abuse were repressed. Appellant, Amy Pratte, asserts that the 12-year statute of limitations in R.C. 2305.111(C), which became effective on August 3, 2006, cannot be applied retroactively to her claim that she suffered childhood sexual abuse, because her memory of the abuse was repressed until after the limitations period expired. Pratte argues that pursuant to this court’s decision in Ault v. Jasko (1994), 70…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Munn v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
  2. State v. CookOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  3. Van Fossen v. Babcock & Wilcox Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1988
  4. Arbino v. Johnson & JohnsonOhio Supreme Court · 2007
  5. Freezer Storage, Inc. v. Armstrong Cork Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978

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

3Cited by38 opinions

  1. State v. WilliamsOhio Supreme Court · 2011
  2. State v. WilliamsOhio Supreme Court · 2011
  3. State v. DelvallieOhio Court of Appeals · 2022
  4. Flagstar Bank, F.S.B. v. Airline Union's Mortgage Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 2011
  5. Doe v. Archdiocese of Saint Paul & MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2012

33 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