Case ID: ohio-law-abs_5/html/0042-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No. 52
    GARLAND et v. SPEIDEL
    No. 20175.
    Supreme Court
    On motion to certify.
    Dock. Nov. 17, 1926,
    4 Abs. 790.
    336. CRIMINAL CONVERSATION — When does the statute of limitations run thereon, from the time the unlawful acts were committed or at the time plaintiff became aware of same?
    1106. STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS — Does fact that cause of action is commenced within time, and same is dismissed without prejudice after time has run, bar a new action arising from the same cause?
    Attorneys — K. L. Coburne, Salem; F. E. Hunter, Alliance, for Garland; Hart and Koeh-ler, Aliance, for Speidel.
   R. L. Garland contends in the Supreme Court

L The statute of limitations begins to run against a cause of action for criminal conversation when the unlawful acts were committed, and out from the time he (Garland) became aware of same.

2. Where an action is brought within the statute and same is dismissed without prejudice after time limit has run, a new action for same cause is barred thereafter.