Legal Opinion

Marrek v. Cleveland Metroparks Board of Commissioners

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided February 22, 1984No. 83-43PublishedCited by 52 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCelebrezze, C.J.

%Ghis case presents the issue of whether a park district is protected by immunity from tort liability. This question requires a determination of whether the defense of sovereign immunity is available to the park district, and if not, whether statutory immunity applies. We conclude that the common-law doctrine of sovereign immunity has been abrogated, but that statutory immunity applies in this case.

I

A similar fact situation and question of governmental immunity were presented in Bokovitz v. Cleveland Metroparks System (May 9, 1983), Cuyahoga App. No. 45215, unreported. The case also involved…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Sega v. State of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
  2. Haverlack v. Portage Homes, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1982
  3. Enghauser Manufacturing Co. v. Eriksson Engineering Ltd.Ohio Supreme Court · 1983
  4. Schenkolewski v. Cleveland Metroparks SystemOhio Supreme Court · 1981
  5. Moss v. Dept. of Natural ResourcesOhio Supreme Court · 1980

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by52 opinions

  1. Peavler v. BD. OF COM'RS MONROE CTY.Indiana Supreme Court · 1988
  2. Sawicki v. Village of Ottawa HillsOhio Supreme Court · 1988
  3. Walker v. City of ScottsdaleCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1989
  4. Winwood v. City of DaytonOhio Supreme Court · 1988
  5. Johnson v. Village of New LondonOhio Supreme Court · 1988

47 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API