COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA NO. 67680 TOMMIE JERNINGHAN, JR. : : ACCELERATED DOCKET : Plaintiff-appellant : JOURNAL ENTRY : v. : AND : LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER, AND : OPINION JOHN DOE AS UNKNOWN NAMED : : : PER CURIAM Defendant-appellees : DATE OF ANNOUNCEMENT OF DECISION: March 16, 1995 CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Civil Appeal from Court of Common Pleas Case No. CV-265856 JUDGMENT: AFFIRMED DATE OF JOURNALIZATION: APPEARANCES: For Plaintiff-Appellant: Tommie Jerninghan, Jr., Pro Se Reg. No. 258-229 Lima Correctional Inst., P.O. Box 4571 Lima, OH 45802 For Defendant-Appellees George M. Moscarino, Esq. (0019447) 1100 Huntington Building 925 Euclid Avenue Cleveland, OH 44115 - 2 - PER CURIAM: An accelerated appeal is authorized pursuant to App.R. 11.1 and Loc.App.R. 25. The purpose of an accelerated docket is to allow an appellate court to render a brief and conclusionary decision. Crawford v. Eastland Shopping Mall Assn. (1983), 11 Ohio App.3d 158; App.R. 11.1(E). Plaintiff-appellant Tommie Jerninghan, Jr. appeals from the trial court's order which granted the motion to dismiss/summary judgment filed by the defendants-appellants Lutheran Medical Center, John Doe, and other unknown medical personnel. The trial court granted a motion to dismiss and/or a motion for summary judgment and stated "... Plaintiff's claim having been barred by the statute of limitations set forth in O.R.C. 2305.111." vol. 757, pg 0495. Since the court did not refer to matters outside the pleadings, and the court gave no notice to the appellant that it was considering the motion as a motion for summary judgment, this court will apply the standard applicable to a Civ.R. 12(B)(6) motion to a dismiss. In order for a court to grant a motion to dismiss pursuant to Civ.R. 12(B)(6), failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, it must appear beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief. The court must presume that all factual allegations of the complaint are true and make all reasonable inferences in favor of the nonmoving party. The court must keep in mind that the civil - 3 - rules require only notice pleading. York v. Ohio State Highway Patrol (1991), 60 Ohio St.3d 143. On February 22, 1994, the appellant filed a complaint for "medical battrey (sic) malpractice". The complaint alleges that on February 29, 1992, he was arrested and transported to the emergency department of Lutheran Medical Center. There, he "was subjected to treatment and blood, urine testing without his consent by said staff in their personal and official capacities." The complaint states that the appellant has suffered from mental distress, personal injures, pain and suffering; loss of freedom as a result of their negligence of the appellee; and that he has lost wages due to the lost time from work. A person commits battery when he unlawfully strikes or touches another. In a medical setting, when a physician treats a person Without consent, the doctor has committed battery. Anderson v. St. Francis-St. George Hosp. (1992), 83 Ohio App.3d 221, citing to Leach v. Shapiro (1984), 13 Ohio App.3d 393. In Ohio, the statute of limitations for battery is set forth in R.C. 2305.111, which states that an action for battery shall be brought within one year after the cause of action accrues. The allegations in the appellant's complaint set forth a cause of action for simple battery. The complaint alleges that the battery occurred on February 29, 1992. The complaint was not filed until February 22, 1994, well past the expiration of the statute of - 4 - limitations. The trial court correctly found that the appellant's claim was barred by the statute of limitations. The appellant argues that the court improperly denied his motions to enforce his discovery requests. However, since a motion to dismiss is rendered on the basis of the complaint alone, the refusal by the court to grant a motion to compel is not error. Judgment affirmed. - 5 - It is ordered that appellees recover of appellant their costs herein taxed. The Court finds there were reasonable grounds for this appeal. It is ordered that a special mandate issue out of this Court directing the Court of Common Pleas to carry this judgment into execution. A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure. JUDGE ANN DYKE JUDGE JAMES D. SWEENEY JUDGE DIANE KARPINSKI N.B. This entry is made pursuant to the third sentence of Rule 22(D), Ohio Rules of Appellate Procedure. This is an announce- ment of decision (see Rule 26). Ten (10) days from the date hereof, this document will be stamped to indicate journaliza-tion, at which time it will become the judgment and order of the court and time period for review will begin to run. .