 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Collins v. Sotka4/29/1998
[Cite as Collins v. Sotka (1998), ___ Ohio St.3d ___.]
Torts - Wrongful death - Discovery rule tolls R.C. 2125.02(D), when - Statute of limitations in wrongful death action that stems from a murder begins to run, when.
1. The discovery rule applies to toll R.C. 2125.02(D), the two-year statute of limitations for a wrongful death claim. (Shover v. Cordis Corp. , 61 Ohio St.3d 213, 574 N.E.2d 457, overruled.)
2. In a wrongful death action that stems from a murder, the statute of limitations begins to run when the victim's survivors discover, or through the exercise of reasonable diligence should have discovered, that the defendant has been convicted and sentenced for the murder.
Submitted December 10, 1997
The underlying facts in this case stem from the tragic abduction and killing of seventeen-year-old Angel C. Ormston by defendant Mark J. Sotka. Angel was last seen alive by family and friends on July 31, 1992. Nearly five months later, on December 15, 1992, two hunters discovered Angel's body in the woods in Perry Township. An autopsy was performed by the Cuyahoga County Coroner's Office, finding the cause of death to be multiple stab wounds in the trunk. The first death certificate listed the date of death as "unknown." However, at the request of Angel's family, a second death certificate was issued listing the date of death as July 31, 1992, the date Angel disappeared.
On January 4, 1993, the Lake County Grand Jury handed down a secret indictment against Sotka, charging him with aggravated murder (count one), aggravated kidnapping (count two), and aggravated felonious assault. On February 5, 1993, Sotka pled guilty to the aggravated murder and kidnapping of Angel. On that same date, but in an order journalized on February 10, 1993, the trial court sentenced Sotka to a term of incarceration of twenty years on count one and to an indefinite term of ten to twenty-five years on count two, to run consecutively to count one.
On February 6, 1995, plaintiff-appellant, Luckye Collins, the administrator for the estate of Angel Ormston, filed a pro se wrongful death action against Sotka and defendant-appellee Kathleen Dudich, the owner of the vacant house where Sotka allegedly killed the decedent. Both Sotka and Dudich sought to dismiss the complaint on the ground that it had not been timely filed within the two-year statute of limitations for a wrongful death action.
Appellee argued that since the wrongful death action was not commenced within two years from the decedent's death (which they said was July 31, 1992), the action was time-barred under R.C. 2125.01. The trial court dismissed the case because the action was not commenced within two years from the date of death.
On appeal, appellant argued that the discovery rule should apply so that the two-year statute of limitations begins to run when the court adjudicates the murder case and states who is responsible for the murder. Only then can a wrongful death action commence. The court of appeals, however, relying on Shover v. Cordis Corp. (1991), 61 Ohio St.3d 213, 574 N.E.2d 457, rejected this argument and refused to apply the discovery rule to this type of case. The court of appeals affirmed the trial court and held that the action was properly dismissed, since the complaint was not filed within two years from the decedent's date of death.
The cause is now before this court upon the allowance of a discretionary appeal.
In the context of a wrongful death action, we are asked to determine when the two-year statute of limitations begins to run. In answering this question, we must decide whether the statute of limitations
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Ohio Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|