Thompson v. Buckeye Joint Vocational School Dist.
55 N.E.3d 1
Ohio Ct. App.2016Background
- J.T., a minor, and his parents sued Buckeye Joint Vocational School District (BJVSD), Buckeye Career Center (BCC), their boards, student Spencer Altier, and teacher John Davis after Altier assaulted J.T. while Davis had transported students to his private residence and left them unattended.
- Plaintiffs alleged assault/battery/IIED against Altier; claims against school entities and Davis included reckless supervision and failure to report child abuse under R.C. 2151.421.
- Defendants moved for judgment on the pleadings arguing governmental and employee immunity under R.C. Chapter 2744.
- Trial court denied immunity, finding plaintiffs pleaded facts that could trigger (1) R.C. 2744.02(B)(5) (civil liability expressly imposed by statute) and (2) exceptions to employee immunity (wanton/reckless conduct and statutory civil liability under R.C. 2151.421).
- On appeal, the court (Gwin, J.) reversed as to the political subdivisions (BJVSD, BCC, boards), holding R.C. 2151.421 does not expressly impose civil liability on political subdivisions; it affirmed as to Davis in his individual capacity, finding plaintiffs sufficiently alleged wanton/reckless conduct and that R.C. 2151.421 expressly imposes liability on school employees.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether school district/boards are entitled to immunity under R.C. 2744 | R.C. 2151.421 creates civil liability for failure to report child abuse, so R.C. 2744.02(B)(5) removes immunity | Political subdivisions are entitled to broad immunity; R.C. 2151.421 does not expressly impose liability on political subdivisions | Reversed: districts/boards immune — R.C. 2151.421 does not expressly impose liability on political subdivisions |
| Whether teacher Davis is entitled to employee immunity under R.C. 2744.03(A)(6) | Plaintiffs: Davis acted wantonly/recklessly and, as a school employee, is covered by R.C. 2151.421 liability exception | Davis: entitled to employee immunity; his acts do not meet exceptions | Affirmed: Davis not entitled to immunity at pleading stage — plaintiffs pleaded wanton/reckless conduct and statutory-liability exception for school employees |
| Whether R.C. 2151.421 expressly imposes liability on an ‘‘employee’’ for failure to report | Plaintiffs: statute lists school teachers/employees and R.C. 2151.421(M) imposes damages on whoever violates (A) | Defendants: statute does not expressly impose civil liability on political subdivisions; scope limited | Held: R.C. 2151.421 does expressly impose liability on school employees (so employee exception applies) but not on political subdivisions |
| Whether Davis was sued only in official capacity (which would convert claim into one against the political subdivision) | Plaintiffs sued Davis individually and/or in official capacity; punitive damages sought indicating individual capacity | Defendants: complaint should be treated as official-capacity only so immunity applies | Held: Complaint and proceedings show Davis sued in individual capacity as well; court did not err in treating individual-capacity claims as viable |
Key Cases Cited
- Butler v. Jordan, 92 Ohio St.3d 354 (Ohio 2001) ("expressly" in R.C. 2744.02(B)(5) means direct/unmistakable imposition of liability)
- Cater v. Cleveland, 83 Ohio St.3d 24 (Ohio 1998) (three-tiered analysis for political subdivision immunity under R.C. Chapter 2744)
- Cramer v. Auglaize Acres, 113 Ohio St.3d 266 (Ohio 2007) (term "person" too general to satisfy "expressly imposes civil liability" for employee immunity exception)
- Anderson v. Massillon, 134 Ohio St.3d 380 (Ohio 2012) (definitions of wanton misconduct and reckless conduct)
- Lambert v. Clancy, 125 Ohio St.3d 231 (Ohio 2010) (official-capacity suits against officeholders are treated as actions against the political subdivision)