Case law

Allied Erecting & Dismantling Co. v. City of Youngstown

151 Ohio App. 3d 16 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 26, 2002

. {¶ 24} “Under the first tier, R.C. 2744.02(A) grants broad immunity to political subdivisions. If immunity is established under R.C. 2744.02(A), such immunity is not absolute, however. … Slivinsky (2001), 141 Ohio App.3d 82, 86-87 , 749 N.E.2d 854 . {¶ 25} Clearly, Allied’s claims for conversion and tortious interference with a contract fall within the general grant of immunity found in R.C. 2744.02(A)(1)

State Ex Rel. Schoener v. Board of County Commissioners

84 Ohio App. 3d 794 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 30, 1992

Strict liability is imposed when an absolute nuisance is found to exist, but negligence must be proved to establish a qualified nuisance. Id., paragraphs two and three of the syllabus. In Metzger v. … We further assume, without deciding, that the county is not protected in this suit by any theory of sovereign immunity. 5 .

Wierzbicki v. Carmichael

118 Ohio App. 239 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 12, 1963

In failing to employ the necessary personnel and other qualified help to supervise plaintiff’s decedent’s hospitalization, so as to prevent him from falling from his bed and sustaining the injury hereinbefore mentioned.” … Stated tersely, the rule of state and county immunity applies to the board of trustees of a county hospital.

Halper v. State

36 Ohio App. 331 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 14, 1930

Up to this point we find that the language is merely descriptive; that the dates above mentioned do not have any application to anything excepting to a dealer under 5526 GC, and it in no way establishes the date of the commission … offense has been charged in the .affidavit under the section of the statute named and that therefore the conviction is unlawful and inasmuch as the cause of reversal is based upon this reason the plaintiff in error is not immune

Silveous v. 5 Starr Salon & Spa, L.L.C.

210 N.E.3d 1020 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 16, 2023

from liability for that claim does not establish such a framework. … Accordingly, Ohio courts have consistently applied the qualified immunity recognized in Scholler and Simon to third party claims of tortious conduct directly related to an attorney's

Wanamaker v. Davis, 2005-Ca-151 (8-24-2007)

2007 Ohio 4340 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 24, 2007

It follows then that Davis is not immune from liability to the Trust, the vested beneficiary, for damages arising from his negligent performance. Id. at 177 . … She then filed an amended petition in which she alleged she was the duly appointed and qualified administratix of the estate.

Roberts v. Columbus City Police Impound Division

195 Ohio App. 3d 51 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 14, 2011

. {¶ 20} Here, the city argues that it qualifies for general immunity under R.C. 2744.02(A)(1) because (1) as a municipal corporation, it is a political subdivision under R.C. 2744.01(F), and (2) the towing, impounding, and … Disabilities, 151 Ohio App.3d 234 , 2002-Ohio-7299 , 783 N.E.2d 959, ¶ 13 (same). {¶ 22} Here, Roberts has failed to establish the applicability of any exception to immunity under R.C. 2744.02(B).

Estate of Smith v. Western Brown Local School Dist.

2015 Ohio 154 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jan 20, 2015

Smith’s contact with Chance did not establish need for alarm. … Hence, the defendants are immune from liability in this action unless the Estate can show that one of the exceptions to immunity identified in R.C. 2744.03(A)(6)(b) applies. Golden, 2011-Ohio-5355 at ¶ 35.

State v. Whiteside

2015 Ohio 3490 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 27, 2015

In overruling both assignments, we note appellant's argument that the trial judge misquoted a part of Kelly's affidavit relating what Whiteside said to Kelly upon re-establishing contact. … "To establish a prima facie violation of the fair-cross-section requirement, * * * a defendant must prove that: (1) a group qualifying as 'distinctive' (2) is not fairly and reasonably represented in jury venires, and (3)

Johnson-Newberry v. Cuyahoga Cty. Child & Family Servs.

2019 Ohio 3655 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 12, 2019

It is well established that an appellate court may only review final orders, and without a final order, an appellate court has no jurisdiction for review. Hubbell v. … Thus, the issue is whether R.C. 4112.02(J) “expressly” imposes civil liability upon Gura and, therefore, qualifies as an exception to immunity.

Martin v. Payne

2021 Ohio 1557 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 3, 2021

Thus the parties agree that there is an exception to Payne’s -17- Case No. 11-20-05 general immunity in this matter if the Martins could establish that Payne was negligent with … However, it is important to emphasize that once a political subdivision establishes general immunity, which is not disputed here, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to show that one of the exceptions to immunity applies

Contreraz v. Bettsville

2011 Ohio 4178 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 22, 2011

R.C. 2744.02(A)(1). {¶23} However, the immunity established under R.C. 2744.02(A)(1) is not absolute; and the subdivision’s immunity is subject to a list of exceptions under R.C. 2744.02(B)(1)-(5). … Once general immunity has been established by the political subdivision, the burden lies with the plaintiff to show that one of the five exceptions under R.C. 2744.02(B) apply. Brady v. Bucyrus Police Dept., 3d Dist.

Doe v. Massillon City School Dist., 2006ca00227 (6-4-2007)

2007 Ohio 2801 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 4, 2007

"Under the first tier, R.C. 2744.02 (A) grants broad immunity to political subdivisions. If immunity is established under R.C. 2744.02 (A), such immunity is not absolute, however. … Youngstown , 151 Ohio App.3d 16 , 2002-Ohio-5179 ). {¶ 18} It is undisputed Appellees qualify for the general immunity granted to political subdivisions. Hubbard , supra at ¶ 11 .

State v. Brock

2026 Ohio 2036 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 1, 2026

Immunity {¶ 106} In his fifth assignment of error, Brock argues that the trial court erred by granting immunity to Dustin Johnson. … R.C. 2945.44 ("Immunity Statute"). The Immunity Statute authorizes the trial court to grant immunity and compel testimony when appropriate, unless doing so would not serve the administration of justice. Id.

Hebert v. City of Canton, Unpublished Decision (2-25-2002)

Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 25, 2002

This right is known in law as qualified immunity. Qualified immunity in this context is a question of federal law. State law immunity has no application to a 1983 claim. … Thereafter, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to establish that the defendant's conduct violated a right so clearly established that any official in the defendant's position would have clearly understood that he was under

Terry v. Ottawa County Board of Mental Retardation & Developmental Delay

165 Ohio App. 3d 638 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 24, 2006

(Emphasis added.) {¶ 31} Clearly, the trial court, in its decision quoted above, evaluated the evidence upon which Dr. … Ottawa County MR/DD’s motion to dismiss on grounds of governmental immunity was granted. It is not a party to this appeal. 2 .

Zachel v. Mahaney

6 Ohio App. Unrep. 201 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jul 13, 1990

To qualify for recreational-user immunity, property need not be completely natural, but its essential character should fit within the intent of the statute "Generally speaking, recreational premises include elements such … For example, we recognize immunity to the owner of a park (which qualifies as recreational premises), whether the injury is to one who is jogging in the park, tinkering with a model airplane or reading poetry to satisfy a

Jones v. Soto

2023 Ohio 3107 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 5, 2023

As such, “‘a police officer * * * cannot be held personally liable for acts committed while carrying out his or her official duties unless one of the exceptions to immunity is established.’” Szefcyk v. … I acknowledge the unique position of police officers and the importance of governmental immunity on their ability to perform their jobs, but that immunity is not limitless.

Kenney v. Cleveland

2018 Ohio 1186 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 29, 2018

That exact date is not established in the record, although the evidence shows that Kenney started her new job in August 2008 and received her first paycheck shortly thereafter. … or quasi-contract, clearly arise out of the employment relationship between her and the City.

State v. Broady

41 Ohio App. 2d 17 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jul 23, 1974

There were several eyewitnesses who identified defendant as the killer and whose testimony was sufficient to establish either that defendant, or someone who resembled him so closely as to be his “double” was the assailant … However, the record does not clearly indicate that an objection was made by defense counsel herein to the invocation of the attorney-client privilege.