Case law

Bank of Am. v. Miller

2016 Ohio 7017 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 23, 2016

Norwalk, 192 Ohio App.3d 331, 2011- Ohio-548, 949 N.E.2d 63 (6th Dist.) regarding the restoration of immunity. … In order to restore immunity under R.C. 2744.03(A)(5) must the political subdivision establish with admissible evidence that discretionary decisions were rendered?

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.

Otterbeing Maineville, L.L.C. v. Carman

2025 Ohio 1013 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 24, 2025

: [I]f the Legislature intended to grant the broad immunity from personal liability [that] the [trial] court found, and which defendants urge, it would have done so more clearly … And residential care facilities like Otterbein qualify as "suppliers" under the Act. Id. at ¶ 28, fn. 5.

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)

Parmertor v. Chardon Local Schools

119 N.E.3d 436 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 4, 2019

Surveillance video establishes 6 seconds elapsed between the first shot that was fired while the gun was still in the backpack and the last shot that was fired in the cafeteria. … Nothing in Baeppler’s curriculum vitea establishes how he is qualified to draw these conclusions regarding the School Employees’ standard of care. {¶36} Further, the ultimate question of whether the Chardon School

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.

Safe Auto Insurance v. Corson

155 Ohio App. 3d 736 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jan 23, 2004

The immunity question is all that remains. The city and Corson claim that the officer had immunity here. … Self-Insured {¶ 22} But even if immunity did apply—which it clearly did not—the city was still a self-insurer in the practical sense, as the trial court held. *741 {¶ 23} Self-insurance is the retention of the risk of loss

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.

Poe v. Univ. of Cincinnati

2013 Ohio 5451 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 12, 2013

Univ. of Cincinnati, 111 Ohio St.3d 541, 2006-Ohio-6208, ¶ 25. {¶7} R.C. 2743.02(F) establishes the procedure for determining the immunity R.C. 9.86 grants, stating "[a] civil action against an officer or employee … Canady accepted input from UC on matters related to the residency program, the record clearly shows Dr.

Estate of Oder v. Wahl

67 Ohio App. 3d 596 · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 8, 1990

The historic judicial and legislative machinations surrounding governmental immunity have been tediously recorded and require no replication here. 3 Clearly, then, the municipality has a duty to keep its streets “open, in … There, as here, the provisions of the MUTCD were relied upon to establish duty and avoid immunity.

Henderson v. Euclid

2015 Ohio 15 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jan 8, 2015

The defendants additionally argued that the officers acted within their qualified and statutory immunity because they did not fabricate or ignore evidence and, in undertaking their investigation, they considered: … is established, the second tier of the analysis asks whether any of the five exceptions to immunity set forth in R.C. 2744.02(B) apply.

State v. Parris

2014 Ohio 4863 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 31, 2014

Thus our agreement for immunity has been breached.” … Although the agreement mentions immunity, it clearly means immunity from prosecution, not a grant of immunity pursuant to R.C. 2945.44.

Wierzbicki v. Carmichael

91 Ohio Law. Abs. 220 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jan 17, 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.

Williams v. Barrick, 08ap-133 (9-11-2008)

2008 Ohio 4592 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 11, 2008

No. 76054 ("[I]t is clear that a guardian ad litem enjoys absolute, rather than merely qualified, immunity in his role as a court-appointed functionary charged with representing the interests of minor children in the judicial … Williams alleged no facts establishing that he had a disability, that Barrick denied him the full and equal enjoyment of a place of public accommodation, or that Barrick owned, leased, or operated a place of public accommodation

Chunyo v. Gauntner

2017 Ohio 5555 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jun 28, 2017

Gauntner the benefits of statutory immunity under R.C. … Immunity from Political Subdivision Tort Liability {¶8} R.C. 2744.03(A) sets forth certain defenses or immunities that may be asserted to establish non-liability in a civil action brought against a political subdivision

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.

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

Howard v. Miami Township Fire Division

171 Ohio App. 3d 184 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 30, 2007

After establishing immunity, the next tier of the analysis turns on whether one of the exceptions to immunity set forth in R.C. 2744.02(B)(1) through (5) applies. Id. … of discretion to which immunity would attach.

Kulich-Grier v. OhioHealth Corp.

2014 Ohio 3931 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 11, 2014

To establish a claim for false imprisonment, the plaintiff must first demonstrate that he or she was confined. Ripley v. Montgomery, 10th Dist. No. 07AP-6, 2007-Ohio-7151, ¶ 39. … Therefore, even if OHP was not immune from liability, OHP is still entitled to summary judgment on Kulich-Grier's false imprisonment claim.

Allen v. Rankin

2013 Ohio 456 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jan 29, 2013

Chapter 2744 establishes a three-step analysis for determining whether a political subdivision is immune from liability. Martin v. Ironton, 4th Dist. No.07CA37, 2008-Ohio-2842, 2008 WL 2381737, ¶9. See Cramer v. … The trial court found that the facts of this case do not qualify so as to invoke any of the exceptions to immunity as defined in R.C. 2744.02(B). We agree.