Saeed v. Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Auth.
2017 Ohio 935
Ohio Ct. App.2017Background
- Vidah A. Saeed (pro se) sued Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority (GCRTA) and CareSource for injuries she alleged resulted from six separate bus accidents occurring between April 2012 and October 2013.
- Saeed initially filed a complaint in December 2014; that action was dismissed without prejudice for want of prosecution on March 24, 2015.
- Saeed refiled on March 25, 2016. CareSource moved to dismiss for failure to state a claim and for lack of factual allegations (and failure to plead fraud with particularity).
- GCRTA moved for summary judgment, arguing Saeed’s personal-injury claims were barred by the two-year statute of limitations and that her refile was outside the one-year savings-period in R.C. 2305.19.
- Saeed claimed electronic-filing technical problems and asked the court to treat the complaint as filed on March 24, 2016; the record contained no clerk’s-office evidence of an attempted timely filing.
- The trial court granted CareSource’s motion to dismiss and GCRTA’s summary-judgment motion. Saeed appealed; the appellate court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether complaint states a claim against CareSource | Saeed listed various torts and made brief references to CareSource (argued generally that claims were pleaded) | CareSource: complaint contains no factual allegations, fails to plead fraud with particularity, so fails to state a claim | Court: Dismissal affirmed — complaint fails to state any viable claim against CareSource; fraud not pled with Civ.R. 9(B) particularity |
| Whether Saeed's personal-injury claims against GCRTA are time-barred | Saeed argued she attempted to file on March 24, 2016 (within savings statute) but encountered server errors | GCRTA: claims barred by R.C. 2744.04(A) two-year statute of limitations; refile after dismissal was one day late under R.C. 2305.19 savings statute | Court: Summary judgment for GCRTA affirmed — claims time-barred; no record evidence of timely filing to invoke savings statute |
Key Cases Cited
- Ohio Bur. of Workers’ Comp. v. McKinley, 956 N.E.2d 814 (Ohio 2011) (standard for Civ.R. 12(B)(6) motion to dismiss — plaintiff must show some set of facts entitling relief)
- In re Application of Black Fork Wind Energy, L.L.C., 3 N.E.3d 173 (Ohio 2013) (pro se litigants are not excused from following procedural rules and are held to the same standards as represented parties)