In the case of Parmertor v. Chardon Local Schools, 2019-Ohio-328, an Ohio appellate court held that the failure to recommend hiring a school resource officer (“SRO”) did not constitute malice, bad faith, wanton, or reckless misconduct – in this case – and, therefore, did not activate the narrow exceptions to the statutory immunity afforded to school employees.
This case involved a tragic incident where a student fatally shot several students in a crowded school cafeteria. After a wrongful death lawsuit was initiated against the school employees for not recommending the hiring of an SRO, the school employees argued that R.C. 2744.03(A)(6) afforded them statutory immunity. The school employees also argued that the limited immunity exception set forth in R.C. 2744.03(A)(6)(b) did not apply to them as not recommending an SRO are neither acts nor omissions taken with malicious purpose, in bad faith, or in a wanton or reckless manner.
Agreeing with the school employees, the Ohio appellate court found that decisions by school employees to not “pursue more proactive measures including budgeting for an SRO *** cannot be characterized as conduct beyond negligence” and, therefore, decisions do not rise to the level of malice, bad faith, wanton, or reckless misconduct. Parmertor at ¶ 51. While the court recognized the gravity of the tragedy, the court refused to impose liability on these school officials as there were no prior incidents of serious violence and the student shooter did not have a history of behavior problems.
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.