Dunning v. Varnau
95 N.E.3d 587
Ohio Ct. App.2017Background
- In 2013 inmate Zachary Goldson died in the Brown County Jail; the Montgomery County coroner and BCI concluded death was suicide by hanging. Brown County Coroner Judith Varnau recorded the cause of death as homicide by strangulation and publicly accused sheriff's office personnel of killing Goldson.
- Varnau prepared a slide presentation alleging foul play, showed it to a grand jury (which declined to indict), announced a second inquest, and issued subpoenas to several Brown County Sheriff's Office employees more than a year after the death.
- Plaintiffs (several sheriff's office employees) sought a TRO and then a permanent injunction prohibiting Varnau from conducting any further inquest or investigation of Goldson's death and from issuing subpoenas related to it; the trial court granted the TRO and later a permanent injunction and awarded $7,500 in attorney fees against Varnau personally.
- The trial court concluded a coroner has statutory authority to investigate and issue subpoenas only within six months of a death and that no statutory authority permits a second inquest to re-prove a cause of death already certified.
- The court found Varnau’s discovery/subpoena requests in the second inquiry were improper, irrelevant, and an overbroad “fishing expedition,” and that continuing her investigation caused irreparable reputational harm to officers and exceeded her statutory authority.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court erred granting protective order on Varnau's discovery requests | Protective order necessary because subpoenas sought irrelevant material and exceeded coroner authority | Protective order improperly limited coroner's investigatory and discovery powers | Upheld: protective order proper because requests were irrelevant and exceeded coroner authority and time limits |
| Whether trial court erred excluding evidence of circumstances of Goldson's death | Exclusion proper because inquiry was about coroner's authority, not relitigation of cause of death | Exclusion prevented Varnau from presenting evidence supporting her homicide finding | Upheld: evidence irrelevant to legal question whether coroner may reopen investigation after certification and beyond six months |
| Whether trial court erred quashing subpoenas and issuing permanent injunction against second inquest | Injunction necessary to stop arbitrary/unreasonable overreach and prevent irreparable harm to officers and public trust | Injunction unlawfully barred coroner from performing a legitimate investigative inquest | Upheld: coroner lacked statutory authority to conduct a second inquest after certifying cause and after six-month statutory window; injunction not an abuse of discretion |
| Whether attorney-fee award for violating TRO was improper or insufficient | Plaintiffs sought full fees for violations and related defense work | Varnau argued fees were excessive/unreasonable | Upheld: trial court acted within discretion, reduced claimed hours and disallowed unreasonable charges, awarded $7,500 as reasonable |
Key Cases Cited
- Fed. Home Loan Mortg. Corp. v. Schwartzwald, 134 Ohio St.3d 13 (Ohio 2012) (standing is a jurisdictional requirement to invoke common pleas court jurisdiction)
- Haig v. Ohio State Bd. of Edn., 62 Ohio St.3d 507 (Ohio 1992) (injunctive relief is equitable and available only when no adequate remedy at law exists)
- State ex rel. Harrison v. Perry, 113 Ohio St. 641 (Ohio 1925) (coroner's statutory actions subject to review where arbitrary or unreasonable)
- Garono v. State, 37 Ohio St.3d 171 (Ohio 1988) (injunction appropriate to restrain public officials acting beyond their statutory authority)
- Bittner v. Tri-County Toyota, Inc., 58 Ohio St.3d 143 (Ohio 1991) (appellate review of attorney-fee awards is for abuse of discretion)