Skip to main content

Pincus v. Pincus

Citations

  • 2025 Ohio 1826

Syllabus

Statute of limitations; saving statute; R.C. 2305.19; one-use restriction; fraudulent transfer; R.C. 1336.09; double-dismissal rule. Judgment affirmed in part and reversed in part. The saving statute, R.C. 2305.19, does not save claims that are refiled a second time after the expiration of the statute of limitations. Accordingly, the trial court did not err in granting defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings based on the defense of statute of limitations as to plaintiff's claims that had been refiled twice outside the statute of limitations. The trial court did err in granting judgment on the pleadings for plaintiff's claims that were refiled only once outside of the statute of limitations because the saving statute applied to those claims.

Judges: Forbes

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

2 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

13 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.