Which of the following is a requirement for a malpractice action against an attorney in Ohio?

In a malpractice action against an attorney in Ohio, proving that the attorney owed a duty to the client is a fundamental requirement. This duty arises from the attorney-client relationship, which entails that the attorney must adhere to the standard of care expected within the legal profession. Establishing this duty is crucial because it forms the basis of the claim, highlighting the attorney's responsibilities towards the client.

In malpractice cases, it's essential to demonstrate that the attorney's conduct fell short of the professional standards expected, resulting in harm to the client. Without establishing that a duty existed, the legal framework for the malpractice claim cannot hold, as there would be no grounds to prove that any alleged negligence had a direct impact on the client’s situation.

Other options do not reflect the core requirement for a malpractice claim. For example, while a written contract may provide clarity in some cases, it is not a universal requirement for establishing a duty. Additionally, client satisfaction is not a legal standard in determining malpractice; instead, it revolves around professional competency and care. Lastly, testimony from a judge is not necessary for establishing a malpractice claim, as the focus is on the attorney's conduct and the established duty of care. Thus, the proof of a duty owed is the essential element for a