Doe v. Greenville City Schools, 220 N.E.3d 763

In Dec. 2019 two students were severely burned in a high-school science class when isopropyl alcohol ignited and a bottle exploded. Plaintiffs alleged negligent supervision and that the classroom lacked a fire extinguisher and other safety equipment/protocols.
Plaintiffs sued Greenville City Schools, its board, the principal, and the teacher, alleging negligence and asserting an exception to political-subdivision immunity under R.C. 2744.02(B)(4).
Greenville moved to dismiss under Civ.R. 12(B)(6), arguing R.C. Chapter 2744 provides immunity and that the absence of safety equipment is not a “physical defect.”
The trial court denied the motion; the Second District Court of Appeals affirmed, relying in part on Moore v. Lorain Metro. Hous. Auth.
The Ohio Supreme Court accepted review limited to whether the absence of a fire extinguisher or similar safety equipment can constitute a “physical defect” under R.C. 2744.02(B)(4).
The Court held that the absence of a fire extinguisher or other safety equipment in a classroom could be a “physical defect” for purposes of the statutory exception to political-subdivision immunity and affirmed the appellate court.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the absence of a fire extinguisher or other safety equipment in a school classroom can qualify as a "physical defect" under R.C. 2744.02(B)(4), thereby defeating political-subdivision immunity	The missing safety equipment made the classroom defective (lack of necessary safety features in a lab setting) and, combined with negligent supervision, satisfies the (B)(4) exception	The absence of a device that is not a structural fixture cannot be a "physical defect"; the classroom was not defective in its material structure and no law required the extinguisher	The Court: absence of safety equipment can constitute a "physical defect" under R.C. 2744.02(B)(4); plaintiffs pleaded sufficient facts to survive dismissal

Moore v. Lorain Metro. Hous. Auth., 121 Ohio St.3d 455 (Ohio 2009) (remanded for trial-court consideration whether removal/absence of a required smoke detector could be a “physical defect” under R.C. 2744.02(B)(4))
Cater v. Cleveland, 83 Ohio St.3d 24 (Ohio 1998) (establishes the three-tiered R.C. 2744 immunity framework)
O'Brien v. Univ. Community Tenants Union, Inc., 42 Ohio St.2d 242 (Ohio 1975) (pleading standard for Civ.R. 12(B)(6): courts accept complaint allegations as true and dismiss only if no set of facts could entitle plaintiff to relief)
R.K. v. Little Miami Golf Ctr., 1 N.E.3d 833 (Ohio Ct. App. 2013) (defines “physical defect” as a perceivable imperfection diminishing worth or utility)