In the case of State ex rel. Yost v. Burns, Slip Opinion No. 2022-Ohio-1326, the Appellate Court ruled that Burns (“Appellee”) was not responsible for embezzlement of public funds because the appellee did not receive or collect the public money that was misappropriated.
Here, the State (“Appellant”) argued that Appellee is liable for the loss of public funds under R.C. 9.39, suggesting that Appellee and a few other officers on the charter school board collected or received the public money on behalf of the school. On the other hand, the Appellee argued that despite requesting the release of the money, the appellee never received or collected the money personally. Appellee further argues that they were acting in their official capacity as the CEO when they requested the release of public funds. Furthermore, Appellee contended that they do not have the authority to neither disburse nor manage public funds. The Appellate Court reasoned with appellee.
In support of its decision, the court reasoned that public officials are only held liable under R.C. 9.39 only when the official, or their subordinates receive or collect money from the public fund. The court stated that appellee never received or collected the misappropriated funds, despite appellee requesting the release of funds. The Appellate Court stated that in order to receive or collect funds under the statute, an individual must display an element of control over the movement of money. Since Appellee only requested the release of funds, which is well within their authority as the CEO of the charter school, Appellee never actually controlled the misappropriated funds. Therefore, the Appellate Court found that the Appellee did not embezzle funds from the charter school public fund.
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.