Legal Opinion

Smith v. Conley

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided May 10, 2006No. 2005-0247PublishedCited by 43 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMoyer, C.J.

{¶ 1} The sole issue presented in this appeal is whether the termination of the attorney-client relationship for purposes of R.C. 2305.11 (time limitation on bringing a legal-malpractice claim) is dependent upon the filing of a motion to withdraw pursuant to a local rule of court.

I

{¶ 2} Appellant, attorney Craig Conley, represented appellee, Clayton Smith, in a criminal trial. At the conclusion of that trial, on August 21, 2002, Smith was found guilty of one count of passing bad checks in violation of R.C. 2913.11. Smith’s sentencing hearing was scheduled for September 26, 2002. In the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Zimmie v. Calfee, Halter & GriswoldOhio Supreme Court · 1989
  2. State v. WilliamsOhio Supreme Court · 2003
  3. Omni-Food & Fashion, Inc. v. SmithOhio Supreme Court · 1988
  4. Fox & Assocs. Co. v. PurdonOhio Supreme Court · 1989
  5. Hooten v. Safe Auto InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 2003

3Cited by43 opinions

  1. Dottore v. Vorys, Sater, Seymour & Pease, L.L.P.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2014
  2. Wallner v. ThorneOhio Court of Appeals · 2010
  3. Citibank, N.A. v. KatzOhio Court of Appeals · 2013
  4. Woodrow v. HeintschelOhio Court of Appeals · 2011
  5. Starner v. OndaOhio Court of Appeals · 2023

38 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