Kalski v. Bartimole

Citations

• 157 N.E.3d 436
• 2020 Ohio 4137

Syllabus

Civ.R. 12(C) motion for judgment on the pleadings Civ.R. 12(E) motion for a more definite statement Civ.R. 12(F) motion to strike legal malpractice claim R.C. 2305.11 cognizable event termination of the attorney-client relationship competency and equitable estoppel. The trial court correctly found a Civ.R. 12(E) motion for a more definite statement could not be directed to a nonresponsive pleading and a Civ.R. 12(F) motion to strike, filed with regard to an answer, was moot when the answer satisfied Ohio's notice pleading requirements. A legal malpractice complaint was properly dismissed pursuant to a Civ.R. 12(C) motion for judgment on the pleadings when the complaint was filed more than one year after (1) the cognizable event that alerted plaintiff-appellant her attorney may have committed an improper act, and (2) termination of the attorney-client relationship. We remand plaintiff-appellant's claim against codefendant-appellee that did not file a Civ.R. 12(C) motion or otherwise seek dismissal of the case, and therefore, the cause of action was unresolved by the trial court.