Except as provided in sections 126.301, 1302.98, 1303.16, 1345.10, and 2305.04 of the Revised Code, an action upon a specialty or an agreement, contract, or promise in writing shall be brought within six years after the cause of action accrued.
Browne v. Artex Oil Co. (Slip Opinion), 2019 Ohio 4809 (Ohio 2019). · cites it 8דThe Fifth District rejected that argument and affirmed the trial court’s judgment.”
Sarmiento v. Grange Mut. Cas. Co., 835 N.E.2d 692 (Ohio 2005). · cites it 9דR.C. 2305.06. However, the parties to a contract may validly limit the time for bringing an action on a contract to a period that is shorter than the general statute of limitations for a written contract, as long as the shorter period is a reasonable one.”
Rayess v. Educ. Comm'n for Foreign Med. Graduates, 2012 Ohio 5676 (Ohio 2012). · cites it 4דecond District Court of Appeals that reversed the trial court judgment and held that an informational pamphlet describing the United States Medical Licensing Examination (“USMLE”) and application materials submitted by Mohamed Bassem Rayess to participate in that examination…”
Yoby v. Cleveland, 2020 Ohio 3366 (Ohio Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 7ד98, which governs the applicable statute-of-limitations period for a breach of contract for a sale of goods.”
Rutana v. Koulinos, 2020 Ohio 6848 (Ohio Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 8ד” She directs us to the prior version of R.C. 2305.06 and contends that this version of the statute and Walker, supra, provide that the correct statute of limitations in this case is 15 years.”
Taylor v. First Resolution Invest. Corp. (Slip Opinion), 2016 Ohio 3444 (Ohio 2016). · cites it 2דAccordingly, absent the borrowing statute, the applicable limitation period for FRIC’s suit would be supplied by R.C. 2305.”
New Riegel Local Sch. Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. Buehrer Grp. Architecture & Eng., Inc. (Slip Opinion), 2019 Ohio 2851 (Ohio 2019). · cites it 2ד80, Section 3(B)(1), 150 Ohio Laws, Part V, at 8028-8029, confirms the General Assembly’s intention that the construction statute of repose “promote a greater interest than the interest underlying” not only the general tort statutes of limitations in R.”
United States Fid. & Guar. Co. v. Truck & Concrete Equip. Co., 257 N.E.2d 380 (Ohio 1970). · cites it 8דThe dispute between the parties in the District Court was as to whether the 15-year statute of limitations, applicable to contracts in writing (Section 2305.06, Revised Code), should be applied to a case arising from a breach of an implied warranty of a written contract for…”
in Re Nationwide Ins. Co. of Am., 494 S.W.3d 708 (Tex. 2016). “was prejudicial because his contract claim, although viable in Texas, was now barred under Ohio law. Ohio law permits contracting parties to agree to a limitations period shorter than the statutory period generally applicable to contract claims, so long as the agreed period is…”
Tabbaa v. Nouraldin, 2022 Ohio 1172 (Ohio Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 6דAn editor’s note to the 2021 amendment to R.C. 2305.06 provides that the limitations period for claims that accrued prior to the effective date of the 2021 enactment shall be the limitations period in existence prior to 2021, or six years from the 2021 effective date, whichever…”
Trinity Fin. v. D'Apolito, 2024 Ohio 825 (Ohio Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 24ד{¶8} Appellant alternatively argued if the mortgage was instead subject to the statute of limitations in R.C. 2305.06 (for a specialty or a written contract), then Appellee was required to file the suit by January 21, 2020 because the cause of action accrued on January 21, 2014…”
Westfield Ins. v. Galatis, 797 N.E.2d 1256 (Ohio 2003). “This is due to Ohio’s 15-year statute of limitations on contract claims, R.C. 2305.06, and partially because insurers acted quickly to modify their policies after the Scott-Pontzer decision.”
Trinity Fin. v. D'Apolito, 2024 Ohio 825 (Ohio Ct. App. 2024). “{¶8} Appellant alternatively argued if the mortgage was instead subject to the statute of limitations in R.C. 2305.06 (for a specialty or a written contract), then Appellee was required to file the suit by January 21, 2020 because the cause of action accrued on January 21, 2014…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.