BlogLine

Ohio’s new R.C. 2307.241 clarifies parties to be named in professional liability lawsuits

11/26/24

By: Cori M. Agnoni and Amy C. Baughman

Ohio’s newly enacted statute, R.C. 2307.241, which took effect on October 24, 2024, alters the approach to bringing liability claims against professional service providers. Its prospective application permits injured parties to file suit in one of three ways. In a tort action alleging respondeat superior or vicarious liability, if liability arises against both parties, a party can file suit against the primarily liable agent, the secondary liable principal, or both the agent and principal.  

A successful claim against only a secondarily liable principal requires that (1) the primarily liable agent acted within the course and scope of the agent’s relationship with the principal, and (2) the agent is not a necessary party to the action for respondeat superior or vicarious liability against the principal unless the tort action is a medical claim against a physician, podiatrist or physical therapist, a dental claim against a dentist, an optometric claim against an optometrist, a chiropractic claim against a chiropractor, or a legal malpractice claim against an attorney.  

The legal principle that respondeat superior or vicarious liability is derivative of the agent’s liability remains unmodified by the new statute. For the principal to be found liable for the act or omission on which the tort action is based, the agent must have committed the act or omission within the course and scope of their employment.  

The new statute, while clarifying parties to be named in professional liability suits brought under vicarious liability theories, also overturns the Ohio Supreme Court’s holding in Elliot v. Durrani, 2022-Ohio-4190. In Elliot v. Durrani, the Court held that an absconding defendant, like a medical practitioner fleeing the state, can toll, or pause, the running statute of repose. Now, the statute prevents evading defendants from benefiting from a tolled statute of repose in (1) product liability claims against the product manufacturer or supplier; (2) medical, dental, optometric, or chiropractic claims; (3) assault or battery claims against a mental health professional; (4) legal malpractice claims; and (5) actions arising out of a defective and unsafe condition of an improvement to real property.  

As a result of the enactment of R.C. 2307.241, injured parties asserting claims under Ohio law now have more clarity when bringing tort actions alleging respondeat superior or vicarious liability, and those impacted by statutes of repose.  

Please contact Amy C. Baughman at amy.baughman@fmglaw.com, Cori M. Agnoni at cori.agnoni@fmglaw.com, or your local FMG attorney for assistance with professional liability claims.