Swint v. Auld

{¶ 1} Jordan Swint filed an action alleging that he had been attacked by a dog owned by defendant, Antennie Auld and/or John Doe. Swint also sued the village of Golf Manor, claiming that it was vicariously liable for Golf Manor Police Officer Matt Haverkamp's actions at the scene of the attack, which had allegedly resulted in Swint sustaining further injuries from the dog.

{¶ 2} Golf Manor moved to dismiss Swint's complaint under Civ. R. 12(B)(6), claiming governmental immunity. The trial court denied the motion, but it did not include a Civ. R. 54(B) certification in its decision. Golf Manor…