Case law

Swoope v. Osagie

2016 Ohio 8046 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 8, 2016

. {¶52} If a claimant establishes a prima facie case of defamation, a defendant may then invoke a conditional or qualified privilege. A & B-Abell Elevator Co. v. Columbus/Cent. Ohio Bldg. & Constr. … The “essential elements” necessary to establish a common-law qualified privilege are “‘good faith, an interest to be upheld, a statement limited in its scope to this purpose, a proper occasion, and publication in a proper

Lucchesi v. Fischer

179 Ohio App. 3d 317 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 17, 2008

See Anello . {¶ 19} Here, the decision in Hubbell qualifies as one of “first impression,” which was not “clearly foreshadowed,” because (1) it resolved a conflict between two appellate districts that had reached opposite … R.C. 4511.01(EE). {¶ 45} The edge drop between the paved shoulder and the unpaved berm is clearly part of either the shoulder or the berm.

Ferguson v. Dyer

149 Ohio App. 3d 380 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 28, 2002

His jurisdiction over the nurse is limited and certainly does not establish a general master-servant relationship.” Id. … Because the anesthesiology group, the general employer in Hanna, retained the right to hire, fire, or substitute for the nurse anesthetist, and the nurse was specially qualified for the work which was outside the scope of

Dearth v. Columbus

2019 Ohio 556 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 14, 2019

in subsection (2) applies to establish the City's liability. … (City's Brief at 15, quoting R.C. 2744.03(A)(5).) {¶ 44} The City asserts that the Dearths, in contending that the City does not qualify for reinstatement of immunity under R.C. 2744.03(A)(5) because the decisions

Johnson v. Dziak

2026 Ohio 1603 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 4, 2026

R.C. 2744.03(A)(6) “prescribes immunities that an employee of a political subdivision may assert to establish nonliability in a civil action for damages allegedly caused by an act or omission in connection with a governmental … To that end, I would conclude the Officers met their initial burden on summary judgment of setting forth evidence establishing they qualified for general immunity. See Hall v.

Estate of Ridley v. Hamilton County Board of Mental Retardation & Development Disabilities

150 Ohio App. 3d 383 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 22, 2002

We agree and hold that such duties are set forth and established by the following code sections. … Clearly, MRDD operates in a geographic region smaller than the state.

Fried, Admin. v. Friends of Breakthrough Schools

2020 Ohio 4215 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 27, 2020

“It is well established that under R.C. 2744.02, political subdivisions are immune from intentional torts.” Wingfield v. Cleveland, 8th Dist. … Our analysis is guided by the notion that EPrep was not required to establish that it is entitled to immunity; rather, Appellees were required to plead facts establishing than an exception to immunity applies.

Colling v. Franklin County Children Services

89 Ohio App. 3d 245 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 29, 1993

On this score, R.C. 2744.02(B)(5) states that an exception to immunity exists where “liability is expressly imposed upon the political subdivision by a section of the Revised Code. ‡ ‡ ‡ M To establish such liability, plaintiffs … Plaintiffs did not establish any record to the contrary.

Davis v. Akron

2014 Ohio 2511 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 11, 2014

When it has been determined that a party generally qualifies for immunity due to its status as a political subdivision, the second tier of the analysis is to determine whether one of the exceptions to immunity set forth … Thus, the question before the Court is whether, at this stage in the proceedings, the City has established that it is immune from liability as a matter of law.

Nonprasit v. Ohio Teaching Family Assn.

199 N.E.3d 153 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 14, 2022

case. {¶ 40} In terms of whether SAJRD qualifies for immunity under the first tier of the analysis, we note that appellees do not dispute that SAJRD is a political subdivision whose maintenance and operation of … SAJRD argues that such evidence of negligence does not establish the existence of a physical defect necessary to establish an exception to the general grant of immunity. 20.  {¶ 46} At the outset, we agree

Ghaster v. Rocky River

2013 Ohio 5587 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 19, 2013

available at common law or established by the Revised Code. … While performing these functions, [the prosecutor] is entitled to only a qualified immunity.”

Korengel v. Little Miami Golf Ctr.

2019 Ohio 3681 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 13, 2019

, would eliminate any duty to protect Ryan from the allegedly hazardous tree and prevent the Korengels from establishing the negligence requirement of the physical-defect exception to immunity. {¶63} Negligence … Appellants contend that the Korengels cannot establish the requisite proximate cause, even if they can show employee negligence with respect to the tree.

Hill v. Schildmeyer

252 N.E.3d 561 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 28, 2024

fail to establish an exception to his immunity. {¶35} Under R.C. 2744.03(A)(6), government employees are immune from tort liability for actions that fall within the scope of their employment and official responsibilities … In other words, a motion for judgment on the pleadings based on immunity must be granted if “the pleadings, construed in a light most favorable to the plaintiff, conclusively establish the affirmative defense” and the

Goad v. Cuyahoga County Board of Commissioners

79 Ohio App. 3d 521 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 4, 1992

An action sounding only in negligence which is brought against county employees for their action in operating a county jail is clearly barred by sovereign immunity pursuant to R.C. Chapter 2744. … The doctrine of absolute sovereign immunity, judicially established, was nullified by the Ohio Supreme Court in Haverlack v. Portage Homes, Inc. (1983), 2 Ohio St.3d 26 , 2 OBR 572, 442 N.E.2d 749 .

Gintert v. Wci Steel, Inc., 2002-T-0124 (12-14-2007)

2007 Ohio 6737 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 14, 2007

If the requirements for the qualified privilege are established, then the burden falls on the plaintiff to show by clear and convincing evidence that the statements were made with actual malice, i.e., that the statements … privilege, as they were made on a matter of common interest as part of the grievance procedure established between WCI and the steelworkers' union.

State v. Wilson

185 N.E.3d 176 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 22, 2022

“The Ohio Supreme Court has clearly held that police officers may qualify as expert witnesses where they possess specialized knowledge that will assist the fact-finder.” State v. … Doc. 360. {¶146} The materials in the record clearly establish that the trial court considered the purposes and principles of felony sentencing in R.C. 2929.11 in addition to the relevant statutory factors listed

Haery v. Spaeth

2025 Ohio 5801 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 30, 2025

The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit has explained that "It is well established that judges and other court officers enjoy absolute immunity from suit on claims arising out of the performance of judicial … out by Chapter 2744 of the Revised Code, which "establishes a three-tiered analysis for determining whether a political subdivision is immune from tort liability."

Winkle v. Zettler Funeral Homes, Inc.

182 Ohio App. 3d 195 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 13, 2009

Instead, the evidence clearly establishes that the release of Ms. Webb’s body, in place of Ms. Reed’s body, was nothing more than a regrettable and unfortunate mistake. … In order to determine the legislature’s intent, the court must look to the statute itself, and “if such intent is clearly expressed therein, the statute may not be restricted, constricted, qualified, narrowed, enlarged or

Salyers v. Burkhart

47 Ohio App. 2d 90 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 19, 1974

That case did deal with the question of governmental immunity as it affects individual office holders which the court determines have a qualified immunity in an action under 42 U. S. … The complaint in the present case, therefore, does not on its face affirmatively establish that no set of facts warranting recovery can be ultimately established by the evidence.

Smith v. A. B. Bonded Locksmith, Inc.

143 Ohio App. 3d 321 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 16, 2001

Statutory Immunity Initially, there are two theories of immunity upon which the defendantsappellees have relied: absolute judicial or quasi-judicial immunity, and qualified statutory immunity under R.C. 2744.03. … R.C. 2744.03(A)(6)(a) through (c) enumerate the three exceptions to qualified statutory immunity for employees of political subdivisions.