Subscribe to School Law Newsletter
Close Window

The Ohio Supreme Court Restricts Political Subdivision Immunity against Former Employees

In the case of Piazza v. Cuyahoga Cty., Slip Opinion No. 2019-Ohio-2499, the Ohio Supreme Court held that statutory immunity does not apply to former public employees so long as the alleged conduct is relative to a matter that arose out of the employment relationship.

In this case, a local newspaper reported that a county employee was terminated from a county in connection with a county scandal, quoting an executive from the county. In response, the former county employee brought a false-light invasion of privacy claim against the county for the news report.

The county argued that the county was immune from liability due to statutory immunity. (See our blog on political subdivision immunity here). The former county employee argued that an exception to statutory immunity applied under R.C. 2744.09(B), which strips a political subdivision of immunity when a public employee brings a civil action against the political subdivision. The county argued that R.C. 2744.09(B) did not apply because the former public employee was not employed with the county when the news report and alleged misconduct occurred.

The Ohio Supreme Court disagreed with the county and found that R.C. 2744.09(B) does not require a plaintiff to be currently employed with a political subdivision when filing a lawsuit against the political subdivision. The Ohio Supreme Court also held that R.C. 2744.09(B) applies to former public employees so long as the alleged conduct arises out of the employment relationship. And, in this case, the Ohio Supreme Court determined that there was a causal connection between the former employee’s claims and the employment relationship with county to satisfy the “arises out of the employment relationship” requirement of R.C. 2744.09(B).

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.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.