Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Experience a New Era in Legal Research with Free Access to Lexis+

Wilson v. Durrani

Wilson v. Durrani

Supreme Court of Ohio

August 5, 2020, Submitted; December 23, 2020, Decided

No. 2019-1560

Opinion

 [***450]  [*419]   French, J.

 [**P1]  This appeal asks whether a plaintiff may take advantage of Ohio's saving statute to refile a medical claim after the applicable one-year statute of limitations has expired if the four-year statute of repose for medical claims has also expired. We apply the plain and unambiguous language of the statute of repose and answer that question in the negative.

Facts and procedural background

 [**P2]  Appellees, Robert Wilson and Mike and Amber Sand, filed complaints against appellants, Abubakar Atiq Durrani, M.D.; his clinic, Center for Advanced  [*420]  Spine Technologies, Inc.; West Chester Hospital, L.L.C.; and UC Health, in the Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas  [***451]  in December 2015. The Sands asserted claims [****3]  that arose out of a spinal surgery that Dr. Durrani had performed on Mike Sand in April 2010, and Wilson asserted claims that arose out of spinal surgeries that Dr. Durrani had performed on him in February and April 2011. Appellees are but a few of the many plaintiffs who have filed similar malpractice and related claims against Dr. Durrani and his clinic.

 [**P3]  Both the Wilson complaint and the Sands complaint acknowledge that appellees had previously filed their claims against appellants in prior actions that were dismissed without prejudice, pursuant to Civ.R. 41(A)(1)(a), but neither complaint provides any additional information about those actions. Nevertheless, the parties agree that the Sands and Wilson initially filed their claims against appellants in the Butler County Court of Common Pleas in March and April 2013 respectively and that appellees voluntarily dismissed those claims without prejudice in late 2015—the Sands on November 25 and Wilson on December 11—before refiling their claims in Hamilton County.

 [**P4]  Appellants moved for judgment on the pleadings in both refiled cases, arguing that Ohio's medical statute of repose, R.C. 2305.113(C), barred appellees' refiled claims because they arose out of surgeries that [****4]  had been performed more than four years before appellees refiled. The trial court agreed and granted appellants' motions.

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

164 Ohio St. 3d 419 *; 2020-Ohio-6827 **; 173 N.E.3d 448 ***; 2020 Ohio LEXIS 2833 ****; 2020 WL 7636010

WILSON ET AL., APPELLEES, v. DURRANI ET AL., APPELLANTS.

Subsequent History: Reconsideration granted by, in part, Remanded by Wilson v. Durrani, 161 Ohio St. 3d 1453, 2021-Ohio-534, 2021 Ohio LEXIS 391, 163 N.E.3d 580, 2021 WL 797820 (Mar. 2, 2021)

Prior History: APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Hamilton County, Nos. C180194 and C180196, 2019-Ohio-3880, 145 N.E.3d 1071 [****1] .

Wilson v. Durrani, 2019-Ohio-3880, 2019 Ohio App. LEXIS 3945, 145 N.E.3d 1071 (Ohio Ct. App., Hamilton County, Sept. 25, 2019)

Disposition: Judgment reversed.

CORE TERMS

statute of repose, saving, refiled, statute of limitations, repose, medical claim, expired, four year, commencement of the action, majority opinion, four-year, one year, merits, express exception, commencement, tolling, district court, new action, occurrence, potential liability, act or omission, medical-malpractice, discovery, one-year, Appeals, accrued, voluntarily dismissed, prior action, recommenced, indefinite

Governments, Legislation, Statute of Limitations, Time Limitations, Statute of Repose, Civil Procedure, Tolling of Statute of Limitations, Discovery Rule, Torts, Tolling, Procedural Matters, Statute of Repose, Professional Malpractice, Healthcare Law, Actions Against Facilities, Defenses, Statute of Limitations, Extensions & Revivals, Tolling, Voluntary Dismissals, Court Order, Dismissal Without Prejudice, Disabilities, Tolling of Statutory Period, Interpretation