2014 Ohio 1167
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- May 10, 2011 accident between McCollums and Bolgrin; statute of limitations expired May 10, 2013.
- McCollums attempted to file a complaint on May 7–8, 2013 with an incomplete Designation Form per Loc.R. 9.02.
- Clerk of Courts refused filing due to incomplete Designation Form; two sections remained unanswered.
- McCollums sought to have the complaint deemed filed as of May 8, 2013; Administrative Judge granted this on May 13, 2013.
- Bolgrin moved for summary judgment and to vacate the May 13 judgment; trial court granted both motions on June 27, 2013.
- McCollums appeal, arguing the court should apply DeHart v. Aetna Life Ins. Co. rather than Norris v. Yamaha Motor Corp. U.S.A.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the May 13 judgment should be vacated and the complaint dismissed as untimely. | McCollums: Norris does not permit discretionary filing decisions; DeHart applies. | Bolgrin: Norris requires dismissal for incomplete designation form. | Reversed; DeHart factors apply on remand. |
| Whether Loc.R. 9.02 permits automatic dismissal for incomplete designation forms. | Rule should not foreclose discretionary relief. | Rule mandates filing rejection for incomplete form. | Remanded to apply DeHart five-factor test. |
Key Cases Cited
- Norris v. Yamaha Motor Corp. U.S.A., 2009-Ohio-4158 (5th Dist. Stark No. 2008 CA 00296 (2009)) (locational-rule discretion analyzed; automatic dismissal not mandated in all cases)
- DeHart v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., 69 Ohio St.2d 189, 431 N.E.2d 644 (Ohio 1982) (establishes five-factor test for discretionary dismissal)
- Webster v. Timken Co., 2005-Ohio-1759 (5th Dist. Stark No. 2004CA00260 (2005)) (abuse of discretion for technical filing error; DeHart applied)
- State v. Diersing, 2012-Ohio-4673 (5th Dist. Delaware No. 2012-CA-26 (2012)) (applied DeHart rationale to motion to suppress timing issue)