No specific laws identified for this ruling.
The court affirmed the trial court's judgment that the school district had no duty to provide a legal defense to the employee (former basketball coach) in a civil action brought by two former students alleging sexual abuse, as the employee was not acting in good faith or within the scope of employment.
CIVIL - PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT - PROVISION OF DEFENSE AT PUBLIC EXPENSE - R.C. 2744.07(A)(1) following amendment to this statute, in order for a political subdivision to be required to provide a defense for its employee, the trial court must determine that the employee's act occurred while he was acting both in good faith and not manifestly outside the scope of his employment the pleadings themselves no longer provide an alternative basis on which to require a subdivision to provide its employee with a defense appellate court held the trial court's finding that the girls basketball coach's sexual activity with two of his students could not reasonably be considered to be in the scope of his employment was supported by competent, credible evidence.
McCormack v. Jefferson Area Local School District
What Happened
A former basketball coach at Jefferson Area Local School District was sued by two former students who alleged sexual abuse. The coach asked the school district to pay for his legal defense, claiming the district should cover his legal costs since he was employed there.
What the Court Decided
Ohio's appeals court ruled against the coach. The court found that the school district did not have to pay for his legal defense. Under state law, employers only must pay for employee legal defense when the employee was acting in good faith and stayed within their job duties. The court determined the coach failed to meet both requirements.
Why This Matters for Workers
This ruling clarifies that employers won't automatically cover legal costs for employee misconduct. Workers should understand that acting outside your job responsibilities or acting in bad faith can mean you lose employer protection and must pay your own legal fees. It also shows courts take seriously whether employee actions actually fit within their legitimate job duties.
This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.
Arbitration; arbitrability; motion to compel arbitration; motion to stay; Ohio Arbitration Act; Federal Arbitration Act ("FAA"); interstate commerce; Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021 ("EFAA"); Franken Amendment; sexual harassment; hostile environment;…
Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 3 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.
This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.