Ohio’s saving statute serves as a crucial lifeline for plaintiffs whose cases are dismissed for procedural reasons rather than on their merits. Codified in Ohio Revised Code § 2305.19(A), the statute provides that when an action “fails otherwise than upon the merits,” plaintiffs may commence a new action within one year after the failure or within the original statute of limitations period, whichever occurs later.
For years, many Ohio courts operated under the belief that the saving statute could only be used once to refile a case. This interpretation stemmed from dicta in Thomas v. Freeman, 79 Ohio St.3d 221 (1997), where the Ohio Supreme Court remarked that “the savings statute can be used only once to refile a case.” This “one-use” limitation was widely cited and followed by lower courts across Ohio.
However, in the landmark decision McCullough v. Bennett, Slip Opinion No. 2024-Ohio-2783, the Ohio Supreme Court definitively rejected this interpretation. The case involved a plaintiff who filed his initial complaint in January 2018, which was dismissed without prejudice when service was returned unclaimed. The plaintiff then filed a second complaint in June 2018, which was also dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. Finally, the plaintiff filed a third complaint in September 2019, after the statute of limitations had expired but within one year of the second dismissal.
The Supreme Court held that nothing in the plain text of R.C. 2305.19(A) supports a “one-use” restriction on the saving statute. The Court explained that when the saving statute applies, a plaintiff may commence a new action within one year of the dismissal, regardless of how many times the case has previously been filed and dismissed. The Court noted that other procedural safeguards, such as Civil Rule 41‘s double-dismissal rule, already protect against abusive refiling practices.
The McCullough decision represents a significant shift in Ohio civil procedure, providing clarity for practitioners and greater access to justice for plaintiffs. The ruling emphasizes that courts should focus on the plain language of the statute rather than imposing unwritten restrictions based on prior dicta.
Our Experience in Civil Litigation
At HV Legal, our litigation team brings over three decades of experience successfully navigating complex procedural issues in Ohio’s state and federal courts. Our attorneys have established a strong track record in civil litigation and appeals, having argued numerous cases before the Ohio Supreme Court and all Ohio appellate districts. We have particular expertise in matters involving procedural rules like the saving statute, dismissals, and refilings, which has proven invaluable in preserving our clients’ rights to pursue their claims. Our deep understanding of Ohio civil procedure, combined with our commitment to staying current with evolving case law as demonstrated by developments like McCullough v. Bennett, allows us to provide strategic guidance that maximizes our clients’ chances of success. Whether handling straightforward civil matters or complex procedural challenges, our experienced team stands ready to protect our clients’ interests through every phase of litigation.
