Court Opinion

ID: 9801091
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 08:45:42.688761+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:50:50.805838
License: Public Domain

Pfeifer, J.,
dissenting. I join Judge Abele’s dissent with respect to R.C.
2323.52(G).
The intent behind the vexatious litigator statute is laudable. Our system of justice will cease to serve a useful function if it is overwhelmed' with meritless lawsuits and there is no question that the vast majority of the suits filed by Bristow are meritless.
Section 16, Article I of the Ohio Constitution provides: “All courts shall be open, and every person, for an injury done him in his land, goods, person, or reputation, shall have remedy by due course of law, and shall have justice administered without denial or delay.” The Constitution does not differentiate between those who have filed frivolous lawsuits in the past and those who haven’t. I am concerned that a valid complaint may not receive the attention it deserves simply because it was filed by a vexatious litigator. Our courts are open to all who have been injured whether or not they have frivolously cried ‘Wolf’ too many times in the past. I therefore dissent.
*22Burton H. Wolfe, urging affirmance for amicus curiae, Burton H. Wolfe.
Laurence A. Neuton, urging affirmance for amicus curiae, Laurence A. Neuton.