Ohio Rev. Code » Chapter 2305
Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 2305.11 (2026)

Time limitations for bringing certain actions

✓ laws through the 2026 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Effective:
June 16, 2021
Latest Legislation:
Senate Bill 13 - 134th General Assembly
PDF:
Download Authenticated PDF
 

(A) An action for libel, slander, malicious prosecution, or false imprisonment, an action for malpractice other than an action upon a medical, dental, optometric, or chiropractic claim, an action for legal malpractice against an attorney or a law firm or legal professional association, or an action upon a statute for a penalty or forfeiture shall be commenced within one year after the cause of action accrued, provided that an action by an employee for the payment of unpaid minimum wages, unpaid overtime compensation, or liquidated damages by reason of the nonpayment of minimum wages or overtime compensation shall be commenced within two years after the cause of action accrued.

(B) A civil action for unlawful abortion pursuant to section 2919.12 of the Revised Code, a civil action authorized by division (H) of section 2317.56 of the Revised Code, a civil action pursuant to division (B) of section 2307.52 of the Revised Code for terminating or attempting to terminate a human pregnancy after viability in violation of division (A) of section 2919.17 of the Revised Code, and a civil action for terminating or attempting to terminate a human pregnancy of a pain-capable unborn child in violation of division (E) of section 2919.201 of the Revised Code shall be commenced within one year after the performance or inducement of the abortion or within one year after the attempt to perform or induce the abortion in violation of division (A) of section 2919.17 of the Revised Code or division (E) of section 2919.201 of the Revised Code.

(C) As used in this section, "medical claim," "dental claim," "optometric claim," and "chiropractic claim" have the same meanings as in section 2305.113 of the Revised Code.

Last updated April 13, 2021 at 3:03 PM

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 740 cases (139 in the last 5 years), 1953–2026 · leading case: Mominee v. Scherbarth, 503 N.E.2d 717 (Ohio 1986).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Mominee v. Scherbarth, 503 N.E.2d 717 (Ohio 1986). · cites it 91× “Given the important considerations involved in these controversies, a brief history of the various challenges to R.C. 2305.11 is essential to the resolution of the cause sub judice.”
Gaines v. Preterm-Cleveland, Inc., 514 N.E.2d 709 (Ohio 1987). · cites it 43× “As a cause of action separate and distinct from medical malpractice, a claim of fraud is subject not to the medical malpractice statute of limitations contained in R.C. 2305.11, but rather to R.C. 2305.09, 2 which pro *57 vides a four-year limitations period for fraud.”
Browning v. Burt, 613 N.E.2d 993 (Ohio 1993). · cites it 49× “” Conversely, appellees contend that under Allenius, supra, the “West 57th” television program was the “cognizable event” which commenced the running of the R.”
Harris v. Cunix, 2022-Ohio-839, 187 N.E.3d 582. · cites it 30× “21AP-13 8 by the one-year statute of limitations in R.C. 2305.11. The victims opposed summary judgment, arguing that their R.”
State ex rel. Ohio Academy of Trial Lawyers v. Sheward, 715 N.E.2d 1062 (Ohio 1999). · cites it 15× “131 as a fifteen-year statute of repose with certain exceptions, and provides for a fifteen-year statute of repose for wrongful death actions involving a product liability claim (R.C. 2125.02[D][2]), a fifteen-year statute of repose for product liability claims (R.”
Oliver v. Kaiser Cmty. Health Found., 449 N.E.2d 438 (Ohio 1983). · cites it 17× “The statute of limitations applicable to medical malpractice, R.C. 2305.11, provides, in pertinent part, that: “(A) An action for * * * malpractice, including an action for malpractice against a physician * * * or a hospital * * * shall be brought within one year after the cause…”
Schwan v. Riverside Methodist Hosp., 452 N.E.2d 1337 (Ohio 1983). · cites it 20× “3d 111 , to uphold the application of R.C. 2305.11 as a bar to recovery. Neither Baird nor Meros , however, presented the equal protection question which we have answered today.”
Browning v. Burt, 66 Ohio St. 3d 544 (1993). · cites it 63× “11(B)(1)—Negligent credentialing of a physician by hospital is not "medical diagnosis, care or treatment" within meaning of R.C. 2305.11—Action against hospital for bodily injury arising from negligent credentialing of physician subject to two-year limitations period in R.”
Antoon v. Cleveland Clinic Found. (Slip Opinion), 2016-Ohio-7432, 71 N.E.3d 974. · cites it 7× “See Article VIII, Section 7, 1802 Constitution and Article I, Section 16, 1851 Ohio Constitution. These constitutional rights have been under assault for decades—since at least the 1970s, when the General Assembly enacted former R.”
Hershberger v. Akron City Hosp., 516 N.E.2d 204 (Ohio 1987). · cites it 14× “We first consider the cause of action alleged by appellant Rickey Hershberger, and whether his claim was timely filed pursuant to R.C. 2305.11(A) and/or 2305.11(B). For the reasons which follow, we reverse the judgments below and remand this cause to the trial court for further…”
Weidman v. Hildebrandt, 2024-Ohio-2931, 254 N.E.3d 2. · cites it 40× “] Statute of limitations—R.C. 2305.11—Libel—Discovery rule—Discovery rule applies to claims of libel based on reputational injuries when the publication of the libelous statements was secretive, concealed, or otherwise inherently unknowable to plaintiff due to nature of the…”
Smith v. Conley, 846 N.E.2d 509 (Ohio 2006). · cites it 11× “{¶ 1} The sole issue presented in this appeal is whether the termination of the attorney-client relationship for purposes of R.C. 2305.11 (time limitation on bringing a legal-malpractice claim) is dependent upon the filing of a motion to withdraw pursuant to a local rule of…”
Show all 740 citing cases →
Ohio Rev. Code § 2305.11(A): 416 cases
Harris v. Cunix, 2022-Ohio-839, 187 N.E.3d 582. “21AP-13 8 by the one-year statute of limitations in R.C. 2305.11. The victims opposed summary judgment, arguing that their R.”
Gaines v. Preterm-Cleveland, Inc., 514 N.E.2d 709 (Ohio 1987). “As a cause of action separate and distinct from medical malpractice, a claim of fraud is subject not to the medical malpractice statute of limitations contained in R.C. 2305.11, but rather to R.C. 2305.09, 2 which pro *57 vides a four-year limitations period for fraud.”
Hershberger v. Akron City Hosp., 516 N.E.2d 204 (Ohio 1987). “We first consider the cause of action alleged by appellant Rickey Hershberger, and whether his claim was timely filed pursuant to R.C. 2305.11(A) and/or 2305.11(B). For the reasons which follow, we reverse the judgments below and remand this cause to the trial court for further…”
Weidman v. Hildebrandt, 2024-Ohio-2931, 254 N.E.3d 2. “] Statute of limitations—R.C. 2305.11—Libel—Discovery rule—Discovery rule applies to claims of libel based on reputational injuries when the publication of the libelous statements was secretive, concealed, or otherwise inherently unknowable to plaintiff due to nature of the…”
Natl. Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, PA v. Wuerth, 2009-Ohio-3601, 913 N.E.2d 939.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2305.11(A)(1): 4 cases
Harris v. Cunix, 2022-Ohio-839, 187 N.E.3d 582. “21AP-13 8 by the one-year statute of limitations in R.C. 2305.11. The victims opposed summary judgment, arguing that their R.”
Kumar v. Higgins, 91 F. Supp. 2d 1119 (N.D. Ohio 2000).
Am. Wholesale Outlet, L.L.C. v. Eckert, 2024-Ohio-5680, 259 N.E.3d 809.
O'Neal v. O'Neal, 23 F. App'x 368 (6th Cir. 2001).
Ohio Rev. Code § 2305.11(A)(2)(a): 1 case
Elliot v. Durrani, 2021-Ohio-3055, 178 N.E.3d 977.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2305.11(B): 81 cases
Mominee v. Scherbarth, 503 N.E.2d 717 (Ohio 1986). “Given the important considerations involved in these controversies, a brief history of the various challenges to R.C. 2305.11 is essential to the resolution of the cause sub judice.”
Gaines v. Preterm-Cleveland, Inc., 514 N.E.2d 709 (Ohio 1987). “As a cause of action separate and distinct from medical malpractice, a claim of fraud is subject not to the medical malpractice statute of limitations contained in R.C. 2305.11, but rather to R.C. 2305.09, 2 which pro *57 vides a four-year limitations period for fraud.”
Schwan v. Riverside Methodist Hosp., 452 N.E.2d 1337 (Ohio 1983). “3d 111 , to uphold the application of R.C. 2305.11 as a bar to recovery. Neither Baird nor Meros , however, presented the equal protection question which we have answered today.”
Opalko v. Marymount Hosp., Inc., 458 N.E.2d 847 (Ohio 1984).
Antoon v. Cleveland Clinic Found. (Slip Opinion), 2016-Ohio-7432, 71 N.E.3d 974. “See Article VIII, Section 7, 1802 Constitution and Article I, Section 16, 1851 Ohio Constitution. These constitutional rights have been under assault for decades—since at least the 1970s, when the General Assembly enacted former R.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 2305.11(B)(1): 56 cases
Browning v. Burt, 613 N.E.2d 993 (Ohio 1993). “” Conversely, appellees contend that under Allenius, supra, the “West 57th” television program was the “cognizable event” which commenced the running of the R.”
Marshall v. Ortega, 87 Ohio St. 3d 522 (2000).
Browning v. Burt, 66 Ohio St. 3d 544 (1993). “11(B)(1)—Negligent credentialing of a physician by hospital is not "medical diagnosis, care or treatment" within meaning of R.C. 2305.11—Action against hospital for bodily injury arising from negligent credentialing of physician subject to two-year limitations period in R.”
Dresher v. Burt, 75 Ohio St. 3d 280 (1996).
Grubb v. Columbus Cmty. Hosp., 691 N.E.2d 333 (Ohio Ct. App. 10th Dist. 1997).
Ohio Rev. Code § 2305.11(B)(1)(2)(b): 1 case
Crookston v. Lykins, 2024-Ohio-5131, 258 N.E.3d 1237.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2305.11(B)(1)(2000): 1 case
Brittingham v. Gen. Motors Corp., 2011-Ohio-6488.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2305.11(B)(2): 3 cases
State v. Brown, 539 N.E.2d 1159 (Ohio Ct. App. 1st Dist. 1988).
Bradford v. Surgical & Med. Neurology Assocs. Inc., 641 N.E.2d 1177 (Ohio Ct. App. 9th Dist. 1994).
Kline v. Felix, 610 N.E.2d 447 (Ohio Ct. App. 9th Dist. 1991).
Ohio Rev. Code § 2305.11(B)(2)(b): 1 case
Kline v. Felix, 610 N.E.2d 447 (Ohio Ct. App. 9th Dist. 1991).
Ohio Rev. Code § 2305.11(C): 4 cases
Ruther v. Kaiser, 2012-Ohio-5686, 983 N.E.2d 291.
Shadler v. Purdy, 580 N.E.2d 822 (Ohio Ct. App. 6th Dist. 1989).
Landrum v. Durrani, No. 1:18-cv-00807 (S.D. Ohio July 2, 2021).
Edwards v. Ohio State Univ. Wexner Med. Ctr., 2025-Ohio-5819.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2305.11(D): 7 cases
Holman v. Grandview Hosp. & Med. Ctr., 524 N.E.2d 903 (Ohio Ct. App. 2d Dist. 1987).
Aluminum Line Prods. Co. v. Brad Smith Roofing Co., 671 N.E.2d 1343 (Ohio Ct. App. 8th Dist. 1996).
Krupansky v. Pascual, 499 N.E.2d 899 (Ohio Ct. App. 9th Dist. 1985).
Sarnovsky v. Snyder, Evans & Anderson, Inc., 525 N.E.2d 826 (Ohio Ct. App. 10th Dist. 1987).
Reese v. K-Mart Corp., 443 N.E.2d 1391 (Ohio Ct. App. 10th Dist. 1981).
Ohio Rev. Code § 2305.11(D)(1): 4 cases
Evans v. S. Ohio Med. Ctr., 659 N.E.2d 326 (Ohio Ct. App. 4th Dist. 1995).
Franks v. Ohio Dep't of Rehab. & Corr., 958 N.E.2d 1253 (Ohio Ct. App. 10th Dist. 2011).
Pollock v. Brian J. Britt, 2021-Ohio-3820, 179 N.E.3d 786.
Notario v. Am. Nat'l Red Cross, No. 2:20-cv-06034 (S.D. Ohio Aug. 24, 2021).
Ohio Rev. Code § 2305.11(D)(13): 2 cases
Thompson v. Cmty. Mental Health Centers of Warren Cnty., Inc., 642 N.E.2d 1102 (Ohio 1994).
Thompson v. Cmty. Mental Health Ctrs. of Warren Cty., Inc., 1994 Ohio 223 (Ohio 1994).
Ohio Rev. Code § 2305.11(D)(2): 1 case
Plastic Surgery Assocs., Inc. v. Ohio Dep't of Ins., 534 N.E.2d 72 (Ohio 1988).
Ohio Rev. Code § 2305.11(D)(3): 46 cases
Browning v. Burt, 613 N.E.2d 993 (Ohio 1993). “” Conversely, appellees contend that under Allenius, supra, the “West 57th” television program was the “cognizable event” which commenced the running of the R.”
Dresher v. Burt, 75 Ohio St. 3d 280 (1996).
Browning v. Burt, 66 Ohio St. 3d 544 (1993). “11(B)(1)—Negligent credentialing of a physician by hospital is not "medical diagnosis, care or treatment" within meaning of R.C. 2305.11—Action against hospital for bodily injury arising from negligent credentialing of physician subject to two-year limitations period in R.”
Grubb v. Columbus Cmty. Hosp., 691 N.E.2d 333 (Ohio Ct. App. 10th Dist. 1997).
Price v. Cleveland Clinic Found., 515 N.E.2d 931 (Ohio Ct. App. 8th Dist. 1986).
Ohio Rev. Code § 2305.11(D)(3)(2000): 1 case
Brittingham v. Gen. Motors Corp., 2011-Ohio-6488.
Ohio Rev. Code § 2305.11(D)(6): 1 case
Steinmetz v. Lowry, 477 N.E.2d 671 (Ohio Ct. App. 1st Dist. 1984).
Ohio Rev. Code § 2305.11(D)(7): 1 case
Grandillo v. Montesclaros, 739 N.E.2d 863 (Ohio Ct. App. 3d Dist. 2000).
Ohio Rev. Code § 2305.11(a): 5 cases
Knowles v. Core Civic Ass'n, No. 2:20-cv-06277 (S.D. Ohio Mar. 15, 2021).
Knowles v. Core Civic Ass'n, No. 2:20-cv-06277 (S.D. Ohio Dec. 28, 2021).
Silvani v. Chang, No. 1:23-cv-00222 (S.D. Ohio June 11, 2024).
Warner v. Binning, 652 F. Supp. 1487 (S.D. Ohio 1987).
McClarty v. Herzog, 5 Ohio App. Unrep. 128 (Ohio Ct. App. 8th Dist. 1990).
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.