LEGAL ROUNDUP – Ohio

Ohio Supreme Court Holds Ohio’s Tolling Statute Does Not Violate Federal Commerce Clause as Applied to a Physician Who Leaves the State to Practice Medicine Elsewhere
Kennedy v. Western Reserve Senior Care, --- N.E.3d ---, 2024-Ohio-5565

The Ohio Supreme Court examined the constitutionality of Ohio’s tolling statute, R.C. 2305.15, as it relates to a physician who was sued for medical malpractice. The physician, who is alleged to have wrongfully caused the death of a patient in 2013, moved from Ohio to Pennsylvania after the patient’s death. The suit was voluntarily dismissed but refiled in 2019, when the health care providers moved for summary judgment, arguing that Ohio’s four-year statute of repose barred the refiling. The appellant contended that R.C. 2305.15 tolled the statute of repose because the physician had moved to Pennsylvania in the midst of this litigation. 

The court analyzed Ohio’s tolling statute under the two-tier approach established in Brown-Forman Distillers Corp. v. New York State Liquor Auth., 476 U.S. 573, 578-579, 106 S.Ct. 2080, 90 L.Ed.2d 552 (1986). First, they determined whether the law directly discriminates against interstate commerce. The court held it did not: “Nothing in the history of the tolling statute suggests that its enactment was motivated by a desire to undertake state economic protectionism.”

In the second tier of the analysis, the court applied a balancing test to determine whether the law impermissibly burdens interstate commerce. The appellees argued there are times where physicians cross state lines for legitimate business purposes, and Ohio’s tolling statute may dissuade them from traveling in or out of Ohio for fear of exposure to continuing legal liability. Yet, the court was not persuaded this is a common enough experience that interstate commerce would be noticeably affected. They held that Ohio’s tolling statute “does not impose a burden on interstate commerce that it is clearly excessive in relation to its putative local benefits.” 

^{The Quarterly Dose – March 2025, has been prepared for our readers by Marshall Dennehey. It is solely intended to provide information on recent legal developments and is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. We welcome the opportunity to provide such legal assistance as you require on this and other subjects. If you receive the alerts in error, please send a note to tamontemuro@mdwcg.com. ATTORNEY ADVERTISING pursuant to New York RPC 7.1. © 2025 Marshall Dennehey. All Rights Reserved.}