2020 Ohio 3832
Ohio2020Background:
- Plaintiff Rebecca Buddenberg sued her former employer and officials alleging civil liability under R.C. 2307.60 for injuries caused by "criminal acts" and under R.C. 2921.03(C) (intimidation civil-liability provision).
- Defendants moved to dismiss those statutory civil claims, arguing civil liability requires an underlying criminal conviction.
- The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio denied the motion without prejudice and certified two state-law questions to the Ohio Supreme Court.
- The certified questions: (1) whether R.C. 2307.60 requires an underlying criminal conviction to support a civil cause of action, and (2) whether a conviction is a condition precedent to a civil claim under R.C. 2921.03.
- The Ohio Supreme Court analyzed statutory text, structure, and precedent and concluded neither R.C. 2307.60 nor R.C. 2921.03(C) requires a criminal conviction before civil liability may be imposed.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Buddenberg) | Defendant's Argument (petitioners) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether R.C. 2307.60 requires an underlying criminal conviction | R.C. 2307.60 predicates liability on a "criminal act," not a conviction; conviction is unnecessary | "Criminal act" implies a crime requiring conviction; legislative history supports a conviction prerequisite | No—statute requires a criminal act, not a conviction; conviction may be evidence but is not required |
| Whether R.C. 2921.03(C) requires a criminal conviction before civil liability | The statute imposes civil liability on anyone who violates the intimidation statute; conviction is not specified | "Commission of the offense" and use of "offense" implies a conviction is needed | No—R.C. 2921.03(C) does not make conviction a condition precedent to civil liability |
Key Cases Cited
- Jacobson v. Kaforey, 75 N.E.3d 203 (Ohio 2016) (R.C. 2307.60 independently authorizes civil actions for harms caused by criminal acts)
- Bryan v. Hudson, 674 N.E.2d 678 (Ohio 1997) (statutory words read in context and given common meaning)
- State ex rel. Savarese v. Buckeye Local School Dist. Bd. of Edn., 660 N.E.2d 463 (Ohio 1996) (unambiguous statutory language must be applied as written)
- Lancaster v. Fairfield Cty. Budget Comm., 699 N.E.2d 473 (Ohio 1998) (give effect to natural and obvious import of statutory language)
- Ohio Neighborhood Fin., Inc. v. Scott, 13 N.E.3d 1115 (Ohio 2014) (rules of statutory construction reaffirming plain-meaning approach)
- Dodd v. Croskey, 37 N.E.3d 147 (Ohio 2015) (courts must not add words to statutes)