2020 Ohio 3820
Ohio Ct. App.2020Background
- Robert Burns was hired as New City Community School’s Director/CEO for the 2009–2010 school year under a contract giving him general supervision and authority to approve budget expenditures.
- Burns shared authority to approve expenditures in the Ohio Dept. of Education electronic accounting system with the school’s chief fiscal officer, Carl Shye; approvals triggered release of state and federal grant funds into New City’s bank accounts.
- New City received $432,989.57 in state and federal funds in 2009–2010; an audit later found more than $50,000 misappropriated.
- The State sued Burns under R.C. 9.39, alleging public-official liability for public money “received or collected” by him or his subordinates; the trial court granted the State summary judgment.
- The appellate majority reversed, holding Burns did not “receive or collect” the funds because he neither possessed nor controlled them; the case was remanded for entry of judgment for Burns.
- A concurring/dissenting judge would have affirmed, reasoning Burns’s role in approving expenditures and broad supervisory title made him strictly liable under R.C. 9.39.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Meaning of “received or collected” in R.C. 9.39 | Broadly read to include acts that cause public funds to be released (e.g., approving expenditures), thus creating control and liability. | Requires actual receipt or control of funds; mere approval of expenditures that triggers disbursement is insufficient. | The phrase is ambiguous; statutory purpose and common-law principles require a showing of receipt/control. Court construed statute to require control/receipt. |
| Whether Burns exercised sufficient control over New City funds | Burns approved final expenditure reports and grant applications and thus exerted control over funds and is strictly liable. | Burns shared approval authority, did not supervise or control the fiscal officer or accounts, and never had possession/control of the funds. | Burns did not receive or control the funds within R.C. 9.39; summary judgment for the State was reversed. (Dissent would have held Burns liable.) |
Key Cases Cited
- Cordray v. Internatl. Preparatory School, 941 N.E.2d 1170 (Ohio 2010) (recognizes public-school officers as public officials and explains R.C. 9.39 codifies common-law strict liability for public funds)
- State v. Herbert, 358 N.E.2d 1090 (Ohio 1976) (discusses strict liability of public officials for loss of public funds under common law)
- Proctor v. Kardassilaris, 873 N.E.2d 872 (Ohio 2007) (principle that courts apply plain statutory language unless ambiguous)
- Dresher v. Burt, 662 N.E.2d 264 (Ohio 1996) (summary judgment burdens and proof obligations)
- Crane Twp. ex rel. Stalter v. Secoy, 132 N.E. 851 (Ohio 1921) (early articulation of public-office-as-trust doctrine)