Ohio Average Personal Injury Verdicts

This page looks at settlement amounts and jury payouts in personal injury cases in Ohio. Our lawyers also provide an analysis of Ohio personal injury law.

If you are a personal injury victim bringing a compensation claim in Ohio, you want to know the possible range of settlement payouts for your claim.  Why? Because money compensation is what a personal injury or wrongful death claim is ultimately about.

This page is designed to look at how personal injury cases have been resolved in Ohio and to give you the ability to match your claim with Ohio personal injury settlement statistics and example settlements and jury payouts.

But.. this is treacherous water.  You cannot compare two similar cases and expect the results to be similar.  No two cases are alike, and sometimes what drives the settlement payout of a case is not understood in a summary of the case.  Still, does looking at comparable cases and statistics give you more information about the possible value of your injury claim?  Of course it does.  That is why we put this information up and why you came to the page, even with all the caveats about how statistics, sample settlements, and verdicts are of limited value.

Ohio Jury Payout Statistics

Jury Verdict Research published a recent study indicating that the average verdict in personal injury lawsuits in Ohio is $303,955. The median personal injury verdict in Ohio is only $13,000. Approximately three percent of Ohio personal injury verdicts exceed $1,000,000.

The study does not show jurisdictional differences. But Ohio is like a country when it comes to settlement value. Jury payouts and settlement amounts will be higher in Cleveland, Cincinnati, Columbus, and Akron than in more rural parts of Ohio.

Recent  Settlements and Verdicts in Ohio

  • 2023, Ohio: $6,190,000 Verdict. A man admitted to a local hospital was prescribed seven new medications that heightened his fall risk. However, the hospital staff did not implement required measures to mitigate his falling risk. Consequently, he fell when attempting to use the restroom, leading to a traumatic brain injury (TBI) that resulted in permanent damage, confining him to a chair in his home. As a result of the incident, a jury awarded the man a significant sum of $6.19 million.
  • 2023, Ohio:  A shunt procedure performed on the plaintiff to address a spinal cyst was contraindicated by a leading neurosurgery textbook and resulted in paralysis, which could have been reversed had a timely MRI been performed. Instead, after several months an MRI revealed that a surgical sponge that had been left inside the patient was compressing her spine. It gets worse.  The plaintiff’s malpractice lawsuit alleged that a second, contraindicated surgery was performed in order to conceal the foreign object that had been negligently left inside the patient.  Her lawyers also introduced evidence at trial showing that Cleveland Clinic administrators pressured its neurosurgeons to perform surgeries in order to boost revenue.  An Ohio jury reached a $7.625 million verdict.
  • 2022, Ohio: $6,000,000 Verdict. A tree branch fell in an 85-year-old woman’s backyard during a storm. It landed on an electric line. The woman’s neighbor reported the fallen branch to the power company. Five hours later, no company representative arrived to address this issue. The woman contacted the power company. A phone representative told her not to worry and that she could go back to sleep. Several hours later, the woman woke up to a fire. She had no working smoke detector. The woman tried to escape. However, she died from smoke inhalation. The woman’s family alleged negligence against the power company. They claimed its employees failed to timely arrive and address the fallen tree branch. The Washington County jury awarded $6,000,000.  It is hard to fathom why the power company let this case go to a jury.
  • 2022, Ohio: $1,275,000 Verdict. A woman drove along I-90 in Cuyahoga County. She slowed down for traffic caused by tree removal. The woman was rear-ended, and she suffered back and pelvis injuries in the car accident. The woman alleged negligence against the at-fault driver and the tree removal company. She claimed the driver excessively sped and operated his vehicle while intoxicated while the tree removal company failed to warn of the lane closure. The Cuyahoga County jury awarded $1,275,000.  Why not just sue the drunk driver?  Car insurance policies are usually limited, and companies have deeper pockets and deeper insurance.
  • 2021, Ohio: $40,384 Verdict. A woman rode with her husband. They were struck by a reversing vehicle. The woman injured her neck, shoulder, arm, and hip. She and her husband alleged negligence against the at-fault driver. They claimed he failed to keep a proper lookout while reversing his vehicle. The Cuyahoga County jury awarded $40,384.
  • 2021, Ohio: $58,000 Verdict. A woman was T-boned at an intersection. She injured her head, neck, and back. The woman alleged negligence against the at-fault driver. She claimed she ran a red light and failed to yield at an intersection. The Cuyahoga County jury awarded $58,000.
  • 2021, Ohio: $108,000 Verdict. A woman shopped at Kroger. She slipped and fell over a puddle. The woman suffered a left patella fracture. One week later, the woman underwent an open reduction internal fixation procedure. She subsequently underwent physical therapy for three months. The woman sustained a six-inch knee scar. She also experienced limited leg mobility. The woman alleged negligence against Kroger. She claimed its employees failed to clean the puddle and warn customers of hazardous conditions. The Licking County jury awarded $108,000.
  • 2021, Ohio: $250,000 Settlement. A 27-year-old man attended a law enforcement class at a community college. He and his classmates received firearm instruction at a shooting range. One of his classmates cleaned his loaded handgun during a break. He placed it on the table. The gun accidentally discharged. A bullet struck the man and exited his ribcage. He suffered spleen, liver, and kidney injuries. The man also suffered a collapsed lung. He alleged negligence against the community college. The man claimed the instructors failed to supervise his classmate. This case settled for $250,000.
  • 2021, Ohio: $2,000,000 Verdict. A 40-something woman suffered severe mid-back pain. She presented to the ER. The woman was diagnosed with a back strain. She was discharged. Over twelve hours later, the woman could not walk. She was brought to a different hospital. The woman was diagnosed with a hematoma. She underwent a hematoma evacuation. The woman developed another hematoma. She underwent a second evacuation. The woman was hospitalized for seven days. She then underwent inpatient physical therapy for three weeks. The woman subsequently underwent several months of outpatient occupational and physical therapy.  She developed residual flank pain and bowel and bladder dysfunction. The woman alleged negligence against the hospital. She claimed its staff failed to properly diagnose her condition and timely remove the hematoma. The Lucas County jury awarded $2,000,000.
  • 2020, Ohio: $115,000 Settlement. A 78-year-old nursing home resident was found unresponsive in the facility’s dining room after choking on a piece of chicken. He had a medical history of swallowing difficulties and was missing several teeth. After being found, the man was brought to the hospital, where he died within a few hours. His estate sued the facility for leaving him unsupervised as he ate. Their expert dietician testified that she found many standard of care violations throughout the facility. The facility contended that they found no signs of swallowing difficulties and argued that the man’s dysphagia improved before he was admitted there. This case settled for $115,000.
  • 2020, Ohio: $60,625 Verdict. A 45-year-old paralegal suffered soft-tissue injuries to her neck, lower back, and shoulder after her vehicle was rear-ended. She underwent multiple treatments, including chiropractic, physical, massage, and acupuncture therapy. The woman also received steroid injections in her neck. Her neck and back injuries would eventually resolve, but her shoulder injuries became permanent. Her treating orthopedic surgeon opined that she would need future arthroscopic surgery. The woman settled with the driver’s liability carrier, USAA, for $25,000. However, she sued her UIM carrier, State Farm, who offered to pay $5,000 in medical bills, which she felt was insufficient. The Franklin County jury awarded her $60,625.29. Her net recovery was $30,625.29, based on the liability settlement and the previous medical expenses.
  • 2020, Ohio: $52,127 Verdict. A man was a passenger in his employer’s truck, which was rear-ended by a vehicle. He suffered undisclosed injuries. The man sued the driver for failing to maintain an appropriate distance. He sought compensation for pain and suffering, lost wages, and medical expenses. The other driver contested liability, disputing the cause and extent of the man’s injuries. A Hamilton County jury ruled in favor of the man, awarding him $52,127.
  • 2019, Ohio: $101,524 Verdict. A man suffered unspecified injuries after an uninsured driver struck his vehicle. He sued both the driver and his UIM carrier, Progressive. The man sought compensation for his injuries, medical expenses, and lost wages. He alleged that Progressive was required to pay him under his policy’s terms. They denied these allegations and claimed that his policy with Progressive was excess coverage. The Cuyahoga County jury awarded him $101,524.
  • 2019, Ohio: $4,000,000 Verdict. A man got into a verbal dispute with a tavern bartender that escalated. He then got into a verbal altercation with a 370-pound bouncer, who hip-checked and slammed the 180-pound man onto the floor, landing on top of him. He suffered a humerus fracture that necessitated open reduction internal fixation surgery. His hardware became infected and was surgically removed. The man claimed he suffered permanent pain and had difficulty lifting his arm above his shoulders. He could no longer work as a union insulator. The man sued the bar for failing to properly train the bouncer to de-escalate a situation. An Ottawa County jury awarded him $4,000,000.
  • 2018, Ohio: $300,000 Verdict. A man was admitted to a hospital for treatment of his Parkinson’s. He experienced swallowing difficulties as a result. A nurse administered ten different medications orally. One of the capsules got caught in his windpipe. The staff could not dislodge it for several hours. He eventually died of asphyxiation. His estate sued the hospital, alleging that one of their nurses breached the standard of care. They also alleged that the nurse failed to properly administer the man’s medications. The Erie County jury awarded a $300,000 payout.ohio verdicts settlements
  • 2017, Ohio: $209,047 Verdict. A married couple came to a stop in traffic on I-270. An uninsured driver was behind them and struck their vehicle. This impact pushed them into the vehicle in front of them. The wife suffered severe unspecified injuries. Besides the driver, they sued their insurer for uninsured motorist coverage. The Franklin County jury awarded them $209,047.
  • 2016, Ohio: $28,745,991 Verdict. A couple arrived at the hospital for their son’s birth. During labor, hospital staff placed a fetal heart monitor whose strips were initially reassuring. However, they deteriorated as labor went progressed. The couple alleged that neither the obstetrician nor the nurses intervened. Their son was not breathing after birth and needed to be resuscitated. He was then transferred to a Children’s Hospital for further care. The baby suffered from oxygen deprivation and was diagnosed with cerebral palsy. The family received a $28,745,991 verdict.
  • 2015, Ohio: $2,700,000 Verdict. A married couple was riding on their trike. Its right-rear axle broke, causing the vehicle to go off-road and strike a ditch. The impact threw the couple into the air. The husband became paralyzed from the chest down and died 40 days later. His widow suffered fractures to her legs, arms, and ribs. She underwent five surgeries to treat her injuries. The estate sued the business that made and sold the axle. They alleged that the axle was of poor quality. The state showed evidence that the axle was not heat-treated, which violated industry standards. The jury awarded $2,700,000. This consisted of $1,033,000 to the widow and $1,042,000 for survivorship to the decedent.
  • 2013, Ohio: $5,250,000 Settlement. The plaintiffs, two parents, file suit after their infant son is born.  As in many of these birth injury claims, the child was deprived of oxygen at birth. Mom presented to the hospital at 3:20 p.m.  She is in early labor.  Her OB/GYN  left her with a second-year resident.  The baby looked good.  Her fetal tracings were fine until midnight.  For the next four hours, conservative intrauterine resuscitative measures had been taken in response to the non-reassuring tracings.  At 4:50 a.m., the fetal monitor flatlined, and an emergency C-section was performed.  The infant was born at 5:10.  Mom and Dad file suit, alleging both doctors were negligent in failing to perform a more timely C-section, leading to complete oxygen deprivation.  The case was bifurcated and after the court found the hospital and doctor to be negligent.  The parties negotiated a $5,250,000 settlement.
  • 2013, Ohio: $400,854 Verdict. A 47-year-old probation officer in Ohio files a medical malpractice suit against Defendant, the University of Toledo Medical Center.  A loss of consortium claim is included on behalf of the victim’s husband.  After a two-year history of pain in the right upper extremity, an EMG revealed evidence of right cubital tunnel syndrome.  Transposition of the ulnar nerve was performed.  During the surgery, the ulnar nerve was transected.  Post-operatively, she continued to treat for pain.  She reported hypersensitivity in her hand and difficulty at work.  After treatment and management of complex regional pain syndrome with stellate ganglion blocks, and a regimen of physical therapy, she underwent a second surgical procedure.  As a result, she resigned from her job as a probation officer due to her inability to keep up with her work duties.  She filed suit claiming permanent complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), hypersensitivity, and difficulty sleeping.  The court determined she should have been able to continue working and declined to award lost wages.  They awarded $250,000 to her for past and future pain and suffering and $854 for out-of-pocket medical expenses.  The husband was awarded $150,000 for loss of consortium.  The total judgment was $400,853.88 plus a $25 filing fee.
  • 2010, Ohio: $75,000 Verdict. A 60-year-old retiree was awarded $75,000 for pain and suffering from being injected with the wrong patient’s blood.  During a routine nuclear stress test, the Plaintiff was hooked up to an IV for injection of medications.  The defendant failed to check Plaintiff’s wristband and injected her with a blood mixture from the patient in the adjoining room.  The blood had not been screened for blood-borne diseases.  Ultimately, there was no evidence of infection, and Plaintiff did not suffer the rejection of the blood, therefore, the Defendants denied liability because Plaintiff did not suffer an injury.  The jury disagreed but did not award a great deal of money.
  • 2010, Ohio: $196,000 Verdict.  A 42-year-old homemaker was awarded $195,500 due to a common bile duct injury requiring additional repair surgery.  Plaintiff underwent a laparoscopic cholecystectomy during which the Defendant surgeon mistakenly clipped and removed a portion of her common bile duct. Defendant claimed that a common bile duct injury is a known risk and complication of the procedure.  An Ohio jury sided with the Plaintiff and awarded her $196,500 for pain and suffering and $70,000 for past medical expenses.  The total verdict was $196,500.

Please don’t read too much into these verdicts and settlements as a path to calculate the value of your own claim.  But these are educational and informational and can shed light on the value of your case.

Ohio Personal Injury Law

Below are some of the most relevant portions of Ohio personal injury law for victims:

Ohio Personal Injury Statute of Limitations

In Ohio, the statute of limitations for filing a personal injury lawsuit is generally two years from the date the injury occurred. This means that if you were involved in an accident or suffered an injury due to someone else’s negligence, you have two years from the date of the incident to file a lawsuit in court.

However, there are some exceptions to this rule. For example, if a government employee or entity caused the injury, the statute of limitations is only 180 days. Additionally, if the injured person is a minor, the statute of limitations is tolled, or paused, until they turn 18 years old, at which point they have two years to file a lawsuit.

Generally, the exceptions to the statute of limitations – that can help or harm victims – are long enough to burn many trees.  So be careful.  One exception to the general rule is medical malpractice lawsuits.

Sexual Assault Statute of Limitations

The statute of limitations for sex abuse lawsuits in Ohio varies depending on whether the sexual abuse occurred when the victim was a minor or an adult. For cases involving child sexual abuse, victims have until their 30th birthday to file a civil lawsuit. However, for adult victims, the window is much shorter, with only one year to sue a known abuser.

Currently, Ohio’s state legislature is deliberating on a new law, Ohio H.B. 124, which aims to extend the statute of limitations for civil sexual abuse lawsuits. If passed, the proposed law would grant victims of child sexual abuse an additional 25 years, allowing them to file a civil lawsuit until their 55th birthday instead of their 30th.

Savings Statute

The Ohio Savings Statute is a law that allows a plaintiff to refile a lawsuit that has been dismissed without prejudice within a certain period of time. Specifically, Ohio Revised Code section 2305.19 states that if a plaintiff’s lawsuit is dismissed for any reason other than on its merits, the plaintiff has one year from the date of dismissal to refile the lawsuit.

So if a plaintiff loses a lawsuit for any reason other than the merits of their case or if their judgment is overturned on appeal, they may file a new lawsuit within one year of the ruling or within the original statute of limitations, whichever is later. This rule also applies to any claims made by the defendant in their defense.

This statute is a great law that elevates substance over form.  It aims to provide plaintiffs with a second chance to pursue their claims in court if their case was dismissed due to a procedural issue, such as a mistake in the filing process, rather than a substantive issue with the case itself.

This does not apply to all claims in Ohio so you want to review the statute cited above.

Ohio Discovery Rule

The Ohio discovery rule is also an exception to the statute of limitations in personal injury cases. Under the discovery rule, the statute of limitations for filing a personal injury lawsuit may be extended if the injured person did not know and could not have reasonably discovered the injury until after the two-year statute of limitations.

“The ‘discovery rule’ generally provides ‘that a cause of action accrues for purposes of the governing statute of limitations at the time when the plaintiff discovers or, in the exercise of reasonable care, should have discovered the complained of injury.”’

The discovery rule applies in cases where the injury is latent, meaning that it is not immediately apparent but becomes noticeable later. For example, if you were exposed to toxic chemicals at work and did not realize the harm until years later, the discovery rule may apply and extend the statute of limitations for filing a personal injury lawsuit.

The discovery rule is a complex legal principle, and determining when the statute of limitations begins to run depends on each case’s specific facts and circumstances. In general, the injured person must prove they did not know and could not have reasonably discovered the injury within the two-year statute of limitations.

Many people think the discovery rule applies when it does not.  In these cases, the law is harsh. The statute of limitations is a strict deadline. If miss it, you may lose your right to file a lawsuit and recover damages for your injuries.

The discovery rule does not provide victims the same protections from a statute of repose.

Ohio Statute of Repose

In Ohio, a statute of repose is a legal deadline that sets a specific period beyond which a lawsuit cannot be filed, regardless of any injury. The statute of repose operates as a bar to legal action. It serves as a cutoff for liability, even if the injury occurred within the period set by the statute of repose.

The statute of repose differs from the statute of limitations, which sets a period for filing a lawsuit after the injury occurs. The statute of repose operates as an absolute bar to legal action, whereas the statute of limitations may be extended, usually by the discovery rule we discuss above.

The Ohio statute of repose is typically shorter than the statute of limitations, which sets the period for filing a lawsuit after the injury occurs. The purpose of the statute of repose is to provide a degree of certainty and finality to potential defendants, allowing them to plan their affairs and investments without the risk of unlimited exposure to liability.

Does the statute of repose apply in wrongful death cases?  This is still an open question that the Ohio Supreme Court will likely decide in 2023.

For a foreign object left in the body, R.C.2305.113(D)(2) sets an accrual date that theoretically expands the statute of repose indefinitely.

Ohio Product Liability

Ohio Revised Code §2305.10 was amended in 205 to include a ten-year statute of repose.

Ohio Construction Statute of Repose

Ohio’s construction statute of repose is ten years.  R.C. 2305.131 applies to all causes of action, whether contract or tort claims, that seek recovery for damages against any who furnished the: (1) design, (2) planning, (3) supervision of construction or (4) construction of the improvement to real property. The purpose of the construction statute of repose is to “protect defendants from having to defend against stale claims.”

Comparative Negligence in Ohio

Over 40 years, Ohio adopted comparative negligence law. Comparative negligence is a legal principle that allows for the allocation of fault among multiple parties in a personal injury case. This means that if a plaintiff is partially at fault for the injury, their damages will be reduced in proportion to their degree of fault.

In Ohio, if the plaintiff’s fault is found to be greater than 50%, they will be barred from recovering any damages. The principle of comparative negligence applies to both contributory negligence (fault of the plaintiff) and comparative fault (fault of both plaintiff and defendant).

Ohio Collateral Source Rule

The collateral source rule is an essential legal principle in Ohio personal injury cases that affects the amount of compensation an injured person may be able to recover. Essentially, the collateral source rule provides that if an injured person receives compensation from a source other than the person or entity responsible for the injury, such as health insurance or workers’ compensation, the defendant cannot reduce their liability by the amount of compensation received from the collateral source.

For example, if you are injured in a car accident, and you have health insurance, your insurance company may pay for your medical expenses. If you later file a personal injury lawsuit against the person responsible for the accident, the defendant cannot argue that your health insurance should offset the amount of damages you are seeking.

The rationale behind the collateral source rule is that the defendant should not benefit from compensation the injured person receives from a source other than the defendant. The rule also recognizes that the injured person should not be penalized for taking advantage of benefits they are entitled to, such as health insurance or workers’ compensation.

It is important to note that the collateral source rule applies only to compensation received by the injured person. If the compensation is received by someone else on behalf of the injured person, such as a family member or legal guardian, the collateral source rule may not apply.

In Ohio, the collateral source rule has been applied in various personal injury cases, including car accidents, medical malpractice, and workplace injuries. However, the rule is subject to exceptions in certain circumstances, such as where the collateral source is a relative of the defendant or where the compensation is received as part of a settlement or compromise.

In conclusion, the collateral source rule is an important legal principle that affects the amount of compensation an injured person may be able to recover in Ohio personal injury cases. The rule provides that the defendant cannot reduce their liability by the amount of compensation received from a collateral source, such as health insurance or workers’ compensation. An experienced personal injury attorney can help you understand the collateral source rule and ensure you receive the total compensation you deserve for your injuries.

Ohio Medical Malpractice

Let’s look specifically at medical malpractice law in Ohio.

What You Must Prove

Under Ohio law, medical malpractice is established by demonstrating, through a preponderance of evidence, that the injury was caused by actions or omissions that deviated from the standard of care expected from a physician or surgeon of ordinary skill under similar circumstances. This involves doing something that a prudent medical professional wouldn’t have done or failing to do something they would have. Expert testimony is typically necessary to prove both negligence and its direct contribution to the injury.

Ohio Malpractice Statute of Limitations Is One Year

R.C. 2305.113(A) mandates that a medical malpractice lawsuit “shall be commenced within one year after the cause of action accrued.” However, R.C. 2305.113(B) “provides an exception to this rule by allowing litigants to extend the one-year statute of limitations for an additional one hundred eighty days from the time proper notice is given to potential defendants.”  This is an awful law but it is one Ohio malpractice lawyers have to deal with.

Ohio Malpractice Statute of Repose

Ohio’s statute of repose for medical malpractice lawsuits is four years. R.C. 2305.113(C) provides that no action may be brought more than four years after the occurrence of the act or omission constituting the alleged basis of the claim. That statute states that “if an action upon a medical, dental, optometric, or chiropractic claim is not commenced within four years after the occurrence of the act or omission constituting the alleged basis [of the claim], then, any action upon that claim is barred.”

RC 2305.113(C) does not apply to the claims of minors. The statute of repose states: “(C) Except as to persons within the age of minority or of unsound mind as provided by section 2305.16 of the Revised Code …” (Does this apply when the minors are wrongful death beneficiaries?  Call an Ohio malpractice lawyer.)

  • This is a good piece that flushed out some of the nuances of the Ohio medical malpractice statute of repose

Expert Required in Malpractice Lawsuit

Rule 10(D)(2) of the Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure requires that a plaintiff in a medical malpractice lawsuit must include an affidavit of merit with their complaint. An affidavit of merit is a sworn statement by a medical expert in which the expert states that:

  1. the expert has reviewed all medical records reasonably available to the plaintiff concerning the allegations in the complaint,
  2. is familiar with the applicable standard of care; and
  3. in the expert’s opinion, the standard of care was breached, and the breach harmed the plaintiff.

The Ohio Supreme Court has said that second requirement means actually practicing in that field.  For example, if a physician holds an executive position and does not have direct oversight over physicians who treat patients, they do not meet the active-clinical-practice requirement outlined in Ohio R. Evid. 601.

In determining the admissibility of expert testimony regarding proximate cause, it hinges on the expert’s opinion expressed in terms of probability. An event is deemed probable if there is a greater than fifty percent likelihood that it caused the occurrence in question. However, there’s no need for the expert to use specific phrases like “reasonable degree of medical certainty” or “probability.” Instead, the expert’s testimony as a whole must convey a sense of probability.

Ohio Malpractice Cap

RC 2323.43, the damage cap statute, defines the limits of “recoverable” damages in a medical malpractice case. The general cap is $250,000 or three times economic damages up to $350,000 (whichever is greater) – unless the plaintiff’s injuries qualify for the $500,000 cap under RC 2323.43(A)(3).  So even if the jury awards $100 million, under 2323.43(D)(1), a trial court may not enter judgment for non-economic loss in an amount that exceeds this Ohio malpractice cap.

This cap is the single reason why Ohio does not have many medical malpractice lawsuits.  This is a tough cap that makes medical malpractice lawsuits in Ohio hard to justify economically unless there are significant economic damages because economic damages are uncapped.

Ohio Informed Consent Law

In Ohio, informed consent is a legal principle that requires healthcare providers to disclose necessary information to patients before performing medical procedures or treatments. The information that must be disclosed includes the nature and purpose of the procedure, the risks involved, and alternative options.

The tort of lack of informed consent in Ohio consists of the following elements:

  1. the physician fails to disclose to the patient and discuss the material risks and dangers inherently and potentially involved with respect to the proposed therapy, if any;
  2. the unrevealed risks and dangers which should have been disclosed by the physician actually materialize and are the proximate cause of the injury to the patient; and
  3. a reasonable person in the position of the patient would have decided against the therapy had the material risks and dangers inherent and incidental to treatment been disclosed to him or her prior to the therapy.

Patients must also give their consent before the procedure is performed. In Ohio, a patient can withdraw their consent at any time before the procedure begins. If a healthcare provider fails to obtain informed consent, the patient may have grounds for a medical malpractice lawsuit.

The informed consent requirement is intended to protect the patient’s autonomy and to ensure that patients make informed decisions about their medical care. But not all information must be disclosed.  The law of informed consent does not require a doctor to fully inform the patient of all the potential risks.

Suing the State of Ohio

The Ohio State Tort Liability Act, encompassed within Ohio Revised Code Chapter 2743 and Chapter 9, specifically governs how tort claims against the State are handled. This act waives the state’s sovereign immunity, allowing citizens to file claims against the state for certain tortious acts.

However, this waiver is subject to numerous restrictions and exceptions. For instance, the state retains its immunity for discretionary acts performed within the scope of an employee’s official duties, including the adoption and enforcement of laws, rules, and regulations.

Nuts and Bolds of Filing a Claim Against Ohio

According to Ohio Revised Code Section 2743.02, any claim against the state must be filed with the Court of Claims. The claim must specify the amount of damages sought and provide a detailed explanation of the circumstances that led to the claim.

Filing a civil action in the Court of Claims constitutes a complete waiver of any cause of action against any officer or employee for the same act or omission. But if the court finds the act or omission was outside the scope of their employment or carried out with malicious purpose, bad faith, or reckless behavior, this waiver is voided.

The court requires that the claimant must have suffered actual damage or loss that can be demonstrated. This might include medical expenses, loss of earnings, property damage, or other tangible losses. The burden of proof rests on the claimant to demonstrate that the state was negligent and that this negligence directly caused the harm suffered.

Notice and Statute of Limitations

Ohio Revised Code Section 2743.16 specifies a statute of limitations for filing a claim against the state. Generally, claimants have two years from the date of the incident to file a claim. However, there may be exceptions depending on the circumstances of the case.

Before a lawsuit can be filed, a notice of intent to sue must be presented to the state. This notice should describe the incident, the alleged negligence, and the damages sought.

Damages and Limitations

The amount of damages that can be awarded in a lawsuit against the state is capped by Ohio law. The liability of the state in damages in any action shall not exceed $250,000 for injury to one person in a single occurrence or $1,000,000 for injury to all persons in a single occurrence. Additionally, the state is not liable for punitive damages, and the law does not allow for the collection of interest on any awarded damages prior to the judgment.

Ohio Product Liability and Mass Tort Cases

Under Ohio law, a manufacturer or seller of a product can be held responsible if that product is defective and that defect causes harm.

There are a number of national mass torts or “class actions” that involve Ohio plaintiffs, including claims our law firm is handling across the country:

  • Hair relaxer lawsuit: chemical hair relaxer products, which are predominantly used by African American women, have been linked to the development of uterine cancer, ovarian cancer, uterine fibroids, and other medical conditions based on recent evidence.
  • Camp Lejeune lawsuit: A new law allows for an end run around the statute of limitations for individuals exposed to the toxic water at the Camp Lejeune Marine Corps base in North Carolina
  • Tylenol autism lawsuit:  Tylenol (acetaminophen) during pregnancy has been shown in some studies to cause autism or ADHD.

Hiring an Ohio Personal Injury Lawyer

Our firm handles serious injury and wrongful death lawsuits in Ohio, working with trusted colleagues in Ohio.  We compensate your Ohio lawyers –  and we are working with the best – out of our attorneys’ fees.  You pay no additional contingency fees for having two law firms instead of one.  And you only owe a fee if you get settlement compensation or a jury payout for you.

If you were hurt and believe you have a potential civil tort claim, get a free no-obligation consultation or call us today at 800-553-8082.

Contact Information