Bixby v. The Ohio State University, 052418 OHCA10, 17AP-802

Docket Nº:17AP-802
Opinion Judge:DORRIAN, J.
Party Name:Lori A. Bixby, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The Ohio State University, Defendant-Appellee.
Attorney:Lori A. Bixby, pro se. Michael DeWine, Attorney General, and Jeanna V. Jacobus, for appellee. Lori A. Bixby. Jeanna V. Jacobus.
Judge Panel:TYACK and BRUNNER, JJ., concur.
Case Date:May 24, 2018
Court:Court of Appeals of Ohio
 
FREE EXCERPT

2018-Ohio-2016

Lori A. Bixby, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

The Ohio State University, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 17AP-802

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Tenth District

May 24, 2018

APPEAL from the Court of Claims of Ohio Ct. of Cl. No. 2017-00567

On brief:

Lori A. Bixby, pro se.

Michael DeWine, Attorney General, and Jeanna V. Jacobus, for appellee.

Argued:

Lori A. Bixby.

Jeanna V. Jacobus.

DECISION

DORRIAN, J.

{¶ 1} Plaintiff-appellant, Lori A Bixby, appeals the October 10, 2017 judgment of the Court of Claims of Ohio dismissing her complaint pursuant to Civ.R. 12(B)(6). For the following reasons, we affirm.

I. Facts and Procedural History

{¶ 2} On June 26, 2017, appellant filed a complaint against defendant-appellee, The Ohio State University. In her complaint, appellant stated she received treatment at The Ohio State University's Stefanie Spielman Comprehensive Breast Center. Appellant alleged she received unnecessary treatment and suffered nerve damage and carpal tunnel symptoms resulting from medication she was prescribed.

{¶ 3} On July 14, 2017, appellee filed a motion, pursuant to Civ.R. 12(B)(6), to dismiss appellant's complaint for failing to support her complaint with an affidavit of merit as required by Civ.R. 10(D)(2). On July 26, 2017, appellant filed a motion to extend time to file an affidavit of merit. On August 18, 2017, the Court of Claims filed an order granting appellant until September 14, 2017 to file an affidavit of merit. On September 14, 2017, appellant filed a motion seeking to avoid the requirement to file an affidavit of merit because the "case is fairly straight-forward" or, in the alternative, seeking assistance in "find[ing] someone who can provide an affidavit of merit." On September 19, 2017, appellee filed a response to appellant's September 14, 2017 motion. On October 10, 2017, the Court of Claims filed an entry dismissing appellant's complaint for failing to state a claim upon which relief can be granted pursuant to Civ.R. 12(B)(6).

II. Discussion

{¶ 4} Initially, we note that appellant elected to proceed pro se both in bringing this action and on appeal. "It is well-established that pro se litigants are presumed to have knowledge of the law and legal procedures and that they are held to the same standard as litigants who are represented by counsel." Sabouri v. Ohio Dept. of Job & Family Servs., 145 Ohio App.3d 651, 654 (10th Dist.2001). "In civil cases, the same rules, procedures and standards apply to one who appears pro se as apply to those litigants who are represented by counsel." Fields v. Stange, 10th Dist. No. 03AP-48, 2004-Ohio-1134, ¶ 7, citing State ex rel. Fuller v. Mengel, 100 Ohio St.3d 352, 2003-Ohio-6448, ¶ 10.

{¶ 5} The Ohio Rules of Appellate Procedure require that an "appellant shall include in its brief, under the headings and in the order indicated * *...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP