Evans v. Akron Gen. Med. Ctr.

Ohio Supreme Court

Evans v. Akron Gen. Med. Ctr.

123 N.E.3d 1025, 2019 Ohio 2156, 156 Ohio St. 3d 1403

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedJune 5, 2019

Docket2019-0284

StatusPublished

This text of 123 N.E.3d 1025 (Evans v. Akron Gen. Med. Ctr.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Evans v. Akron Gen. Med. Ctr., 123 N.E.3d 1025, 2019 Ohio 2156, 156 Ohio St. 3d 1403 (Ohio 2019).

Pincite

Opinion

MOTION AND PROCEDURAL RULING

On review of an order certifying a conflict. The court determines that a conflict exists. The parties are ordered to brief the questions stated at pages 3 and 5 of the court of appeals' entry filed February 11, 2019: "Is a claim asserted against an employer for negligent hiring, supervision, or retention limited by the statute of limitations governing the employee's alleged misconduct?" and "Does the language of Strock v. Pressnell, 38 Ohio St.3d 207, 217[, 527 N.E.2d 1235] (1988) require that a plaintiff show the liability of an employee in order to maintain a negligent hiring, supervision, or retention action against an employer?" The conflict case is Bishop v. Miller, 3d Dist. Defiance Nos. 4-97-30 and 4-97-31, 1998 Ohio App. LEXIS 1526 (Mar. 26, 1998).

Sua sponte, cause consolidated with 2019-0453, Evans v. Akron Gen. Med. Ctr., and briefing in case Nos. 2019-0284 and 2019-0453 shall be consolidated. The parties shall file two originals of the briefs permitted under S.Ct.Prac.R. 16.02 through 16.04 and include both case numbers on the cover page of the briefs. The parties shall otherwise comply with the requirements of S.Ct.Prac.R. 16.01 through 16.04.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

MOTION AND PROCEDURAL RULING

On review of an order certifying a conflict. The court determines that a conflict exists. The parties are ordered to brief the questions stated at pages 3 and 5 of the court of appeals' entry filed February 11, 2019: "Is a claim asserted against an employer for negligent hiring, supervision, or retention limited by the statute of limitations governing the employee's alleged misconduct?" and "Does the language of Strock v. Pressnell, 38 Ohio St.3d 207, 217[, 527 N.E.2d 1235] (1988) require that a plaintiff show the liability of an employee in order to maintain a negligent hiring, supervision, or retention action against an employer?" The conflict case is Bishop v. Miller, 3d Dist. Defiance Nos. 4-97-30 and 4-97-31, 1998 Ohio App. LEXIS 1526 (Mar. 26, 1998).

Sua sponte, cause consolidated with 2019-0453, Evans v. Akron Gen. Med. Ctr., and briefing in case Nos. 2019-0284 and 2019-0453 shall be consolidated. The parties shall file two originals of the briefs permitted under S.Ct.Prac.R. 16.02 through 16.04 and include both case numbers on the cover page of the briefs. The parties shall otherwise comply with the requirements of S.Ct.Prac.R. 16.01 through 16.04.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

123 N.E.3d 1025, 2019 Ohio 2156, 156 Ohio St. 3d 1403, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/evans-v-akron-gen-med-ctr-ohio-2019.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack