Opinion

Pauley v. City of Circleville

  • 137 Ohio St. 3d 212
  • 998 N.E.2d 1083
  • 2013 Ohio 4541
Court
Ohio Supreme Court
Filed
Oct 16, 2013
Status
Published
Author
Pfeifer
On the bench
Kennedy, O'Donnell, Lanzinger, French, Pfeifer, O'Neill
Cited by
16 cases

The opinion

Pfeifer, J.,

dissenting.

{¶ 40} I join Justice O’Neill’s dissent, although I do not share his enthusiasm for the recreational-user statutes. In particular, the immunity provisions contained in R.C. 1533.18 and 1533.181 are overbroad and provide unreasonable and, with respect to governmental entities, unconstitutional protection to premises owners.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.