Getch v. Orndorf
2013 Ohio 3973
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- Cheryl Getch, executrix of her late husband’s estate, retained Orndorff to represent her in probate administration.
- Getch alleges Orndorff performed inadequately and sought to discharge him after concerns were raised by family members.
- Getch alleges she terminated the attorney-client relationship around January 21–22, 2010, after telling Orndorff his services were no longer needed.
- Getch picked up her file and records on January 26, 2010, and later filed a complaint for legal malpractice on January 26, 2011.
- The trial court granted summary judgment, holding the one-year statute of limitations for legal malpractice had run by January 22, 2010 and barred the claim.
- On appeal, Getch argues the limitations period began later and/or that cognizable events occurred within the limitations period.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| When did the attorney-client relationship terminate? | Getch contends termination date was later (e.g., March 29, 2010). | Orndorff contends termination occurred no later than January 22, 2010. | Termination occurred January 22, 2010. |
| Did a cognizable event occur within the limitations period to start the clock later? | Getch argues cognizable events may have occurred after termination. | Orndorff contends cognizable events occurred before termination. | Cognizable events occurred before January 22, 2010, so accrual began earlier. |
| Was Getch able to create a genuine issue of material fact regarding the cognizable event after conflicting testimony? | Getch asserts there is a factual dispute about when cognizable event occurred. | Orndorff argues the record shows no cognizable event within the limitations period. | No genuine issue; the record supports summary judgment in favor of Orndorff. |
Key Cases Cited
- Zimmie v. Calfee, Halter & Griswold, 43 Ohio St.3d 54 (1989) (accrual when client discovers injury or when relationship terminates, whichever is later)
- Omni-Food & Fashion, Inc. v. Smith, 38 Ohio St.3d 385 (1988) (establishes cognizable event/discovery rule in legal malpractice)
- Smith v. Conley, 109 Ohio St.3d 141 (2006) (terminates accrual date determined by parties’ actions)
- Dresher v. Burt, 75 Ohio St.3d 280 (1996) (Dresher reciprocal burden rule on summary judgment for statute-of-limitations defense)