Articles
Practice Areas
Attorneys
What a Difference a Day Makes
What Sauter v. Integrity Cycles Means for Your Case
Anyone who has voluntarily dismissed a lawsuit, but later wants to refile it should be aware of the Ohio Supreme Court’s recent decision addressing the time limit under Ohio’s “saving statute,” Ohio Revised Code 2305.19.
What Is Ohio’s Saving Statute?
Think of the saving statute as a second chance window when a lawsuit fails for reasons other than on the merits of the claims.
Ohio law gives plaintiffs one extra year to refile a lawsuit that was dismissed “otherwise than on the merits.” This frequently applies when a plaintiff voluntarily dismisses their own case prior to trial.
Sauter v. Integrity Cycles, L.L.C answered a long-standing question of what does “within one year” mean.
The Dispute in Sauter
Sauter voluntarily dismissed his lawsuit involving a motorcycle accident on January 5, 2022, and refiled on January 6, 2023. Integrity Cycles filed for summary judgment, arguing the refiling fell outside of the one-year time period under ORC 2305.19. Sauter claimed the filing was timely. Ohio courts had previously split on when the year count started – the day of the dismissal or the following day.
The Ohio Supreme Court’s Decision
The Ohio Supreme Court emphasized that the plain meaning of “one year” means exactly one year, ending on the anniversary date of the dismissal. It viewed the other time counting statutes (ORC 1.14, ORC 1.44, ORC 1.45) as supporting the measurement of months and years based on calendar anniversaries. Based on this interpretation of Ohio law, Sauter missed the deadline by one day, so his refiled case was time‑barred.
Dissenting Opinion
Two of the justices issued a dissenting opinion concluding the law requires the calendar year to begin on the day after the dismissal and end on the same calendar day one year later. Had that been the majority opinion, then the one‑year clock would have started the next day, making Sauter's January 6 filing timely
What This Means for Lawsuits Moving Forward
This decision creates a bright-line rule. Cases that are voluntarily dismissed under the savings statute have to be refiled by the same date a year later. If the anniversary date is missed, the claim is lost.
Some Practical Advice
The saving statute remains a powerful protective tool, but as with any limitation period, re-filing a complaint with ample time-margin is best practice. From the defense perspective, it is important to note when a plaintiff has voluntarily dismissed a case to ascertain whether a refiling is timely.
If You Have Questions
Should you have any questions regarding how this ruling may affect ongoing or future cases, please contact one of our Business Litigation attorneys.
______________
Disclaimer: This alert has been prepared by Eastman & Smith Ltd. for informational purposes only and should not be considered legal advice. This information is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney/client relationship.