Subscribe to School Law Newsletter
Close Window

Public Duty Immunity and Inflatable Obstacle Courses

In the case of Abdou v. Ohio Dep’t of Agric., 2020-Ohio-6937, the Ohio Tenth District Court of Appeals held that the Ohio Department of Agriculture (“ODA”) was immune from liability regarding an injury suffered from an inflatable obstacle course.

The injured individual argued that the ODA was responsible for the injuries suffered by the individual because the ODA failed to ensure a safety wedge was properly installed on an inflatable obstacle course. The Court of Appeals disagreed and held that the ODA was immune from liability.

The Court of Appeals reasoned that, under R.C. 2743.02(A)(3)(a), “the state is immune from liability in any civil action or proceeding involving the performance or nonperformance of a public duty.” The Court noted that absent a special relationship, the ODA’s inspection and licensing of the inflatable obstacle course was conduct relating to a public duty and therefore was protected by public duty immunity.

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Your email address will not be published.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.