Cincinnati City School District Board of Education v. Conners
974 N.E.2d 78
Ohio2012Background
- CPS auctioned nine vacant school buildings in June 2009; materials warned they may not be used as educational facilities.
- Buyer agreement required use for commercial development and prohibited school use; deed restriction prohibiting future school use included, with CPS exempt from restriction.
- Conners bid $30,000 for Roosevelt School and signed sale docs including the deed restriction; title conveyed June 30, 2009.
- Conners later sought to reopen as a charter school; CPS moved to enforce the restriction via declaratory judgment and injunction.
- Trial court and court of appeals held the deed restriction void as against public policy; legislature history shows preference for charter schools.
- This Court held that the deed restriction is unenforceable as against public policy.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether deed restriction violates public policy | Conners argue restriction contravenes policy favoring charter schools. | CPS argues public policy is narrow; statute does not bar such terms. | unenforceable as against public policy |
| Whether R.C. 3313.41/G governs disposition here | Gives charter schools first offer; public policy supports | ||
| transfer to community schools. | Statute not controlling post-auction sale; legislature cautions; deed valid. | not enforceable; policy supersedes |
Key Cases Cited
- Lamont Bldg. Co. v. Court, 147 Ohio St. 183 (Ohio 1946) (contract enforceability unless public policy violated)
- Lake Ridge Academy v. Carney, 66 Ohio St.3d 376 (Ohio 1993) (freedom to contract balanced against public welfare)
- Cincinnati Bd. of Edn. v. Volk, 72 Ohio St. 469 (Ohio 1905) (board of education powers and public interest in schools)
- J.F. v. D.B., 116 Ohio St.3d 363 (Ohio 2007) (public policy limits on contracts for public welfare)
- Kinney, 95 Ohio St. 64 (Ohio 1916) (public policy restrains contracts against public good)
- Eagle v. Fred Martin Motor Co., 157 Ohio App.3d 150 (Ohio 2004) (public policy limits on contracts and restraints)
- Arbino v. Johnson & Johnson, 116 Ohio St.3d 468 (Ohio 2007) (legislative branch as arbiter of public policy)
- United Paperworkers Internatl. Union v. Misco, Inc., 484 U.S. 29 (S. Ct. 1988) (judiciary accounts for public interests in private agreements)
- W.R. Grace & Co. v. Rubber Workers, 461 U.S. 757 (S. Ct. 1983) (public policy considerations in contracts)