# Buchman v. Board of Education

> Ohio Supreme Court · August 23, 1995 · 73 Ohio St. 3d 260

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6772232

## Case

- **Full name:** Buchman, and Cross-Appellee v. Board of Education of the Wayne Trace Local School District, and
- **Court:** Ohio Supreme Court
- **Decided:** August 23, 1995
- **Citations:** 73 Ohio St. 3d 260; 652 N.E.2d 952
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurring in part by Wright
- **Judges:** Analysis, Apply, Cook, Douglas, Moyer, Ohio, Only, Paragraph, Pfeifer, Resnick, Sweeney, Syllabus, That, Thevenir, Unconstitutional, Wright
- **Cited by:** 75 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6772232

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that a plaintiff who was rendered a permanent C-4 quadriplegic due to the complete transection of his spinal cord had an employment potential and, therefore, it could not be found to a reasonable degree of certainty that he will receive social security benefits beyond …
- holding that under R.C. 2744.05(B), a collateral Case No. 2013-00452JD -17- DECISION benefit “is deductible only to the extent that the loss for which it compensates is actually included in the jury’s award”
- holding that Social Security and Medicare benefits are the type of collateral source benefits contemplated by R.C. 2744.05(B)”

## Opinion text

Wright, J.,
concurring in part and dissenting in part. I concur in paragraphs one, two, three, five and six of the syllabus in this case. However, for the reasons stated in Chief Justice Moyer’s dissenting opinion in Sorrell v. Thevenir (1994), 69 Ohio St.3d 415 , 633 N.E.2d 504 , which I joined, I believe that R.C. 2744.05(B) is constitutional as literally read. The constitutionality of R.C. 2744.05(B) is further buttressed by the state’s important interest in preserving the financial *281 soundness of its political subdivisions. Under the unambiguous language of R.C. 2744.05(B), all collateral benefits received by a claimant should be “deducted from any award against a political subdivision,” not merely those benefits that are actually included in a jury’s award. Accordingly, I dissent to paragraph four of the syllabus.
Moyer, C.J., and Cook, J., concur in the foregoing opinion.
Pfeifer, J. I concur in paragraph four of the syllabus and in judgment only. I would apply this court’s analysis in Sorrell v. Thevenir (1994), 69 Ohio St.3d 415 , 633 N.E.2d 504 , to this case and hold that R.C. 2744.05(B) is unconstitutional.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6772232. Public record. Not legal advice.