Skip to main content

Plush v. Cincinnati

Ohio Ct. App.December 16, 2020No. C-200030Cited 16 times

Case Details

Judge(s)
Crouse
Status
Published
Procedural Posture
appeal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Wrongful Termination

Outcome

The court of appeals affirmed in part and reversed in part the trial court's denial of a motion to dismiss in a wrongful death case arising from a 911 dispatching failure. Governmental immunity was reinstated for the City of Cincinnati and its employees in their official capacities, but the case was remanded as individual defendants may face liability for reckless conduct.

Excerpt

MUNICIPAL – IMMUNITY – R.C. CHAPTER 2744 – R.C. 128.32: In a wrongful-death case alleging that the city's operation of a faulty and inadequate 911 system caused the death of plaintiffs' son, the trial court erred in denying the motion to dismiss as to the city and its employees in their official capacities: the city and its employees were immune from liability under R.C. Chapter 2744 because they were engaged in a governmental function and no exceptions in R.C. 2744.02(B) applied to remove immunity. The R.C. 2744.02(B)(5) exception does not apply where the allegations in the complaint relate to the operation and maintenance of a 911 system: R.C. 128.32(A)(1) expressly imposes liability upon a political subdivision only for misconduct relating to the creation of a 911 system. The R.C. 2744.02(B)(4) exception does not apply where the complaint failed to establish that the death occurred in or on the grounds of buildings used in connection with a governmental function. The trial court properly denied the motion to dismiss as to the employees in their individual capacities: the employees were not entitled to immunity under R.C. 2744.03(A)(6) because the complaint sufficiently alleged that the employees acted in a reckless or wanton manner. [But see DISSENT: The complaint did not sufficiently allege knowledge by the officers that their conduct would in all probability result in injury as required to establish reckless or wanton conduct under R.C. 2744.03(A)(6).]

What This Ruling Means

This case involved a wrongful death lawsuit against the City of Cincinnati and its employees over a faulty 911 system that allegedly contributed to someone's death. The family sued the city and individual employees, claiming the inadequate emergency response system was responsible for their son's death. The Ohio Court of Appeals ruled that the City of Cincinnati and its employees cannot be held liable when acting in their official work duties. The court found they were protected by "governmental immunity" - a legal shield that protects government entities and employees from most lawsuits when performing official government functions. However, the court sent the case back to the lower court to determine if individual employees might still face personal liability if they acted recklessly. This matters for government workers because it confirms they generally have strong legal protection when doing their official job duties, even when things go wrong. The city and employees acting in their official roles were shielded from the lawsuit. However, the ruling also shows that individual government employees could potentially face personal consequences if their conduct goes beyond normal job performance into reckless behavior. This protection applies specifically to government workers, not private sector employees.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 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. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.