Case law

Nunn v. Ohio Dept of Ins.

2016 Ohio 279 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jan 26, 2016

the court complaint that he was a disabled Vietnam veteran suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder. {¶ 7} In the court complaint, he alleged that the ODI had communicated with him and told him he did not qualify … The court specifically referenced some of the voluminous case law which indicates that a state agency is generally immune from liability for the performance or nonperformance of a public duty. {¶ 10} With this background

Needham v. Columbus

2014 Ohio 1457 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Feb 20, 2014

subdivisions; (b) The design, construction, reconstruction, renovation, repair, maintenance, and operation of a public cemetery other than a township cemetery; (c) The establishment … Appellant's complaint clearly frames the city's function here as one of maintenance and repair of the sidewalk.

State v. Blackford

2013 Ohio 1632 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 22, 2013

It appears appellant is arguing he has some sort of qualified immunity to obtain a visitor's pass. {¶29} State's Exhibits 1, 2, and 3 were warning letters to Mr. … Dubose, 117 Ohio App.3d 219, 222 (7th Dist. 1997), we concur with our brethren when they concluded, "[t]he prosecution established beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant-appellant, without any privilege to do so,

Porter v. Probst

2014 Ohio 3789 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 29, 2014

As mentioned above, sovereign immunity bars a promissory estoppel argument. … In order to establish a procedural due process violation, it must be shown that the conduct complained of deprived plaintiff of a liberty or property interest without adequate procedural safeguards. Roe v.

Buyer's First Realty, Inc. v. Cleveland Area Board of Realtors

139 Ohio App. 3d 772 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 14, 2000

Additionally, CABOR contends that it is immune from suit for its role as arbitrator in the Collis and Rossi/Averton commission disputes. … It is, therefore, necessary and within the doctrines of quasi-judicial immunity, that arbitrators be immune from suits for acts performed within their capacity as arbitrators and performed within their assigned duties and

Love v. Hamilton Cty. Job. & Family Servs.

2025 Ohio 2498 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jul 16, 2025

immunity. … See, e.g., Plush at ¶ 47 (affirming denial of motion to dismiss where the court could not “say that the complaint ‘obviously or conclusively’ established that the officers were merely negligent and thus immune from liability

Rodgers v. Derue

75 Ohio App. 3d 200 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 23, 1991

The trial court granted appellees’ motion for summary judgment based on sovereign immunity. … The facts sub judice are clearly distinguishable from those in Reynolds . Unlike the officer in Reynolds , Officer Ferrell was experienced and trained.

DeMartino v. Poland Local School Dist.

2011 Ohio 1466 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 24, 2011

Appellee clearly states he is a student, and was participating in that capacity in his high school marching band. … Because the trial court did not fully consider this issue, which, if established, would dissolve immunity, we must remand to the trial court for further proceedings.” Id., ¶25.

S.A.S. v. Wellington School

2020 Ohio 4478 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 17, 2020

The decision went on: "Defendant Dibble clearly fits within the statute's description of 'actor.' … See, e.g., April 25, 2019 Entry at 6 ("Dibble clearly fits within the statute's description of an 'actor.'

Frederick v. Westfield Companies

59 Ohio App. 3d 34 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jan 20, 1989

Finch (1987), 32 Ohio St. 3d 360 , which is clearly distinguishable from the case at bar.” … In fact, they were clearly uninsured.

Katsafaros v. Agathakos

52 Ohio App. 290 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Apr 8, 1935

The regulations adopted by this statute are of that character, and do not enfringe upon the privileges and immunities guaranteed by Article 4, §2 of the Federal Constitution to the citizens in the several states nor breach … We come then to the question whether the plaintiff may recover under the allegations of the petition in this case, which clearly state a violation of law and seek a judgment therefor.

Franklin v. Columbus

130 Ohio App. 3d 53 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Sep 24, 1998

Finally, the exceptions giving rise to liability are in turn subject to specifically enumerated defenses or immunities through which a political subdivision may establish nonliability. See R.C. 2744.03. … Because the operation of a water system clearly constituted a proprietary function under R.C. 2744.01(G)(2)(c) and because the city clearly acted negligently in prematurely turning on the water despite being told not to,

Kraynak v. Youngstown City School District Board of Education

172 Ohio App. 3d 545 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Mar 12, 2007

Thus, based on *564 the evidence and law provided, the jury’s verdict was not clearly against the weight of the evidence. … Chapter 2744 * * * was not yet effective, and the public-duty rule was clearly viable.

Ohio Bell Tel. Co. v. Cleveland

2013 Ohio 270 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jan 31, 2013

The first tier is the general grant of immunity set forth in R.C. 2744.02(A)(1), which establishes that a political subdivision is immune from liability incurred in connection with either a governmental function or proprietary … Ohio Bell submitted evidence establishing that test holes were drilled in the area above the damaged PVC conduit.

Townsend v. Kettering

194 N.E.3d 457 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 5, 2022

subdivision because such actions may later qualify as an exception to immunity); see also Defs.’ … Sovereign Immunity {¶ 19} The Ohio immunity statute, R.C. 2744.03, creates a presumption of immunity for official government acts carried out by political subdivisions and their employees.

Family Med. of Stark Cty., Inc. v. Smart

2017 Ohio 5866 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Jul 17, 2017

The magistrate determined that while statements made to the State Medical Board of Ohio and the Ohio Board of Nursing are only entitled to qualified privilege and Moresetta could be held liable for her statements if she … However, we do not read Hecht to provide such an exception to absolute immunity. {¶29} We find no plain error in the magistrate and trial court’s determination that Moresetta Smart is entitled to absolute immunity

Gilbert v. Cleveland

2013 Ohio 5317 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Dec 5, 2013

The City filed a motion for summary judgment asserting that it was entitled to immunity pursuant to R.C. Chapter 2744. … Burt, 75 Ohio St.3d 280, 1996-Ohio-107, 662 N.E.2d 264. {¶5} The City qualifies as a political subdivision for purposes of establishing immunity under R.C. 2744.02(A)(1).

Henry v. City of Akron

27 Ohio App. 3d 369 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 23, 1985

of municipal immunity. … Of course, statutory grants of immunity remain viable. 2 See, generally, Annotation (1980), 1 A.L.R. 4th 448 .

Held v. City of Rocky River

34 Ohio App. 3d 35 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Oct 14, 1986

R.C. 701.02 provides immunity, however, to fire fighters while engaged in duty at a fire, which Cahill clearly was. … This was clearly an emergency situation to which Cahill responded by removing Held from the danger.

State v. Wildman

2025 Ohio 2793 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Aug 8, 2025

“momentary” restraint may qualify as [a]bduction, if it produces the required risk of physical harm to, or fear in, the victim.’ ” Id., quoting State v. Saylor, 1995 WL 276103, *9 (2d Dist. … Steele, 2013-Ohio-2470, ¶ 26. {¶ 26} Based on the foregoing standards, the State was required to present evidence establishing that, without any legal immunity, license or right, Wildman knowingly: (1) used force