In the case of Doe v. Cuyahoga Cty. Community College, 2022-Ohio-527, the Ohio Eighth District Court of Appeals remanded a negligent hiring case back to the trial court to determine whether any acts or omissions of college administrators were taken with malicious purpose, in bad faith, or in a wanton or reckless manner.
Here, a college student alleged that college administrators negligently hired a dance instructor who sexually assaulted the student after the administrators disregarded background checks warning that the dance instructor may pose a potential threat to students. The college administrators argued that they were immune from liability under the Political Subdivision Tort Immunity Act (R.C. Chapter 2744). The Court disagreed.
In finding in favor of the student, the Court explained that a question of fact remained as to what the administrators knew before they hired the dance instructor. If the administrators were aware of warnings in the background check, the Court explained that the R.C. 2744.03(A)(6)(b) exception to immunity may apply if it is proven that the acts or omissions of college administrators were taken with malicious purpose, in bad faith, or in a wanton or reckless manner.
To read this case, click here.
Authors: Matthew John Markling and the McGown & Markling Team.
Note: This blog entry does not constitute – nor does it contain – legal advice. Legal jurisprudence is like the always-changing Midwestern weather. As a result, this single blog entry cannot substitute for consultation with a McGown & Markling attorney. If legal advice is needed with respect to a specific factual situation, please feel free to contact a McGown & Markling attorney.