(A) An action to revive a judgment can only be brought within ten years from the time it became dormant, unless the party entitled to bring that action, at the time the judgment became dormant, was within the age of minority, of unsound mind, or imprisoned, in which cases the action may be brought within ten years after the disability is removed.
(B) For the purpose of calculating interest due on a revived judgment, interest shall not accrue and shall not be computed from the date the judgment became dormant to the date the judgment is revived.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 23
cases (10 in the last 5 years), 2000–2025 · leading case: Martin v. Stoddard (In re Stoddard), 248 B.R. 111 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio 2000).
Martin v. Stoddard (In re Stoddard), 248 B.R. 111 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio 2000). · cites it 8דHowever, under O.R.C. § 2325.18, 3 the holder of a judgment has only twenty-one (21) years, from the time the judgment becomes dormant, to bring an action to revive the judgment, after which time the judgment, although technically still in existence, becomes completely…”
Bill Swad Chevrolet, Inc. v. Dunson, 2019-Ohio-680. · cites it 7דWe agree that the amendment to R.C. 2325.18 does not contain a clear express legislative intent to apply the statute retroactively.”
Austin v. Mid-Ohio Pipeline Servs., L.L.C., 2023-Ohio-1958, 217 N.E.3d 122. · cites it 2ד(B) Except as provided in divisions (C) and (D) of this section and subject to section 2325.18 of the Revised Code, interest on a judgment, decree, or order for the payment of money rendered in a civil action based on tortious conduct or a contract or other transaction,…”
Walker v. Shondrick-Nau, 2014-Ohio-1499. · cites it 4דAt the time the judgment became dormant, the prior version of R.C. 2325.18 (effective October 1, 1953, to June 1, 2004) was in effect and provided for a 21-year statute of limitations for revivor proceedings.”
Zimmerman v. Bowe, 2019-Ohio-2656. “03(B) states: Except as provided in divisions (C) and (D) of this section and subject to [R.C. 2325.18], interest on a judgment, decree, or order for the payment of money rendered in a civil action based on tortious conduct or a contract or other transaction, including, but not…”
Brandt v. Pompa, 2021-Ohio-845, 169 N.E.3d 285. “Finally, he admitted that any questioning of Brandt about the sexual abuse outside of a therapeutic setting — such as her testimony at Pompa’s criminal trial — could lead to an increase in the intensity of her symptoms.”
State v. Sands, 2021-Ohio-659. “] The trial court committed prejudic[ial] error when the court revive[d] its dormant judgment entry that is barred by the (10) year statute of limitation R.C. 2325.18(A) in violation of the defendant[’s] [U]nited [S]tates constitutional rights due process amendment 14.”
Omni Credit Servs. v. Leston, 2013-Ohio-304. “R.C. 2325.18 provides that a dormant judgment must be revived within “ten years from the time it became dormant.”
Discover Bank v. Wells, 2018-Ohio-4637. “R.C. 2325.18(A). {¶ 21} In this case, there is nothing in the record to support a finding that the judgment was ever dormant.”
Selwyn v. Grimes, 2014-Ohio-5147. · cites it 5דWhen Selwyn originally received his judgment on June 21, 1985, the time period for reviving a dormant judgment was 21 years, but R.C. 2325.18 was amended on June 2, 2004, and the time limit for revivor of a dormant judgment is now ten years.”
State v. Moore, 2021-Ohio-1616. “{¶ 8} R.C.2325.18(A) provides the following time limits for when a judgment can be revived: (A) An action to revive a judgment can only be brought within ten years from the time it became dormant, unless the party entitled to bring that action, at the time the judgment became…”
State v. T.W.C., 2024-Ohio-49, 233 N.E.3d 821. “” R.C. 2325.18(A). {¶ 18} Here, the record reflects that nothing happened to prevent the judgment in case No.”
Bill Swad Chevrolet, Inc. v. Dunson, 2019-Ohio-680. “We agree that the amendment to R.C. 2325.18 does not contain a clear express legislative intent to apply the statute retroactively.”
State v. Sands, 2021-Ohio-659. “] The trial court committed prejudic[ial] error when the court revive[d] its dormant judgment entry that is barred by the (10) year statute of limitation R.C. 2325.18(A) in violation of the defendant[’s] [U]nited [S]tates constitutional rights due process amendment 14.”
Discover Bank v. Wells, 2018-Ohio-4637. “R.C. 2325.18(A). {¶ 21} In this case, there is nothing in the record to support a finding that the judgment was ever dormant.”
State v. Moore, 2021-Ohio-1616. “{¶ 8} R.C.2325.18(A) provides the following time limits for when a judgment can be revived: (A) An action to revive a judgment can only be brought within ten years from the time it became dormant, unless the party entitled to bring that action, at the time the judgment became…”
State v. T.W.C., 2024-Ohio-49, 233 N.E.3d 821. “” R.C. 2325.18(A). {¶ 18} Here, the record reflects that nothing happened to prevent the judgment in case No.”
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.