Thomas Gelwicks Law Office
Accident & Injury Law
Blue Ash | Cincinnati
Free Initial Consultation
Call 513-421-6688
or submit your case for review
Free Initial Consultation
Call 513-421-6688
or submit your case for review
Empowering Lawyers
A common failure of inexperienced Cincinnati car accident lawyers is exaggerating the evidence. It is generally true that “facts can’t speak for themselves.” At the same time, they don’t stretch - facts lack elasticity. However, in the pressure of litigation combat, many lawyers oversell what the facts truly represent, irrespective of who is hearing the case in the Cincinnati courtroom. What feels right at the time, in an adrenalin rush, can inflict wholesale damage on the plaintiff’s otherwise solid car accident case. The trier of fact - arbitration, mediation, judge or jury - can be relied upon to receive the facts for what they are.
Once the exaggeration line has been crossed, credibility is gone. And if opposing counsel is sharp, they will use it against you as they would a stiletto blade. What is true for spouses is equally true with attorneys. Once credibility is impaired, regaining it is difficult if possible.
The Ohio Supreme Court decision of Gliozzo v. University Urologists of Cleveland (2007), 114 Ohio St. 3d 141 has put a treacherous spin on the always-tricky matter of perfecting service. Astute lawyers always approach service of process with contemplation of the details that can cause an action to fail before it starts. The Gliozzo decision has just made causes of action anything but routine.
The Ohio Court dismissed a medical malpractice suit, stating that the service was never perfected on the defendant hospital. The plaintiff filed suit in a way that seems beyond dispute. However the defendant attacked on grounds of sufficiency of process. The case was conducted with the usual discovery in excess of one year. The case even advanced through many depositions, reports and pretrial practice. Yet 17 months subsequent to the answer being filed, the defendant then moved to dismiss on the basis of process insufficiency. Justice Lanzinger wrote the majority opinion, upholding the trial court’s granting of the motion. This hyper-technical finding is adverse to a reasonable administration of justice. But that’s the law we are obliged to follow, or risk termination of all claims even long after the defendant insurance company has been aware of all allegations.
It would be wise to diary to re-check after the answer is filed, as to whether there has been proper Ohio service of process, irrespective of what the defendant is claiming at that time. If there is any question about this, make a personal appeal as to what the Cincinnati-based defense counsel is stating, depending upon your relationship with them in the Cincinnati bar. Otherwise, consider clearing this up through admissions or even stipulations.
Whether consideration of the proper jurisdiction or venue is complex or not depends on the circumstances of the claim. These matters can be transparently obvious or can be maddeningly difficult. Forum selection, which is inadequately thought out, can lead to a great deal of unnecessary challenges - particularly in the Cincinnati-based federal court. This can delay the processing of the action, which for the auto accident plaintiff and their family is always exquisitely frustrating.
Ohio civil practice compels legal counsel to entertain all subject matter jurisdictional issues. The limits for monetary damages and territorial scope are key. Whether the defendant in the Cincinnati court system is amenable to suit in Ohio is a consideration for the court as well.
If there is a possibility that the defendant might seek removal to federal court from the Ohio state court - based on diversity - this is important. Often an attorney in southwestern Ohio develops a reputation for how aggressive or frequently they will challenge on this basis.
Ohio Civil Rule 3(B) guides lawyers in southwestern Ohio to not overlook the county of proper venue. If there is more than one proper forum available, then the Cincinnati-area court has almost complete discretion as to the disposition of the matter. The court will look to practical considerations such as relative convenience, docket traffic, and the local practices within our southwestern Ohio legal community.
