In Sauter v. Integrity Cycles, LLC, Slip Opinion No. 2026-Ohio-88, a 5-2 opinion issued January 15, 2026, the Supreme Court of Ohio determined how a year is calculated for purposes of refiling a lawsuit under the saving statute, R.C. 2305.19. The Court found that to satisfy the one-year saving statute deadline, a refiling must occur by the exact one-year anniversary of the dismissal date – not one year plus a day. In doing so, the Court interpreted R.C. 1.14 and R.C. 1.45 to determine the correct calculation.
The plaintiff’s claims in Sauter arose out of a motorcycle accident after a test drive at Integrity Cycles in 2018. Plaintiff filed a complaint in March 2020, which he subsequently dismissed on January 5, 2022. On January 6, 2023, he refiled his complaint, arguing that his claim was preserved under the saving statute. He relied on R.C. 1.14, which provides that “[t]he time within which an act is required by law to be done shall be computed excluding the first and including the last day.”
He also cited the Supreme Court of Ohio, Cox v. Dayton Pub. Schs. Bd. of Educ., 2016-Ohio-5505, which previously adopted a method of counting months under R.C. 1.14 where the time period ends one day after the day of the month from which the calculation has begun. Using this method of counting, Sauter argued that his filing on January 6, 2023, was timely.
The Ohio Supreme Court disagreed, explaining that a year means twelve consecutive months. It referred to the plain terms of R.C. 1.45, which provides that “[i]f a number of months is to be computed by counting the months from a particular day, the period ends on the same numerical day in the concluding month as the day of the month from which the computation is begun.” In other words, the deadline to refile under the saving statute was within one year, or the calendar anniversary date of the dismissal date, and in this instance, January 5, 2023. The Court relied on the plain language of the saving statute and found that “within one year” means that the deadline would end on the numerical date one year later, reflecting the ordinary usage of “one year.” Since Sauter refiled his complaint on January 6, 2023, his claim was one day late and therefore untimely.
The dissent argued that a year should be calculated as twelve consecutive months starting the day after the dismissal, based on statutory interpretation since R.C. 1.14 provides the deadline “shall be computed by excluding the first and including the last day.” Under this interpretation, the clock begins on January 6, 2022, and the deadline to file would end on January 6, 2023, rendering Sauter’s refiling timely.
Based on the majority’s opinion, Ohio law is clear that to satisfy the one-year saving statute deadline, a refiling must occur by the one-year calendar anniversary of the dismissal date – not one year plus one day.
If you have any questions regarding this decision, please contact a member of Reminger’s General Liability Practice Group.
Attorneys
Cleveland
Columbus
Cincinnati / Ft. Mitchell
Youngstown