Legal Opinion

Zents v. Board of Commissioners

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided February 22, 1984No. 83-6PublishedCited by 40 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWilliam B. Brown, J.

The basic issue presented in this case is whether the doctrine of governmental immunity bars appellants’ suit against Summit County. With the limitations set forth in this opinion, this court holds that the doctrine of governmental immunity will no longer operate to insulate counties from liability for their tortious acts.

*205The doctrine of governmental immunity has been much discussed by this court as of late. This court has discussed this doctrine in the context of park districts,1 municipal corporations,2 school boards,3 public libraries,4 and the state5 itself. It is of no surprise, then,…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Haverlack v. Portage Homes, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1982
  2. Enghauser Manufacturing Co. v. Eriksson Engineering Ltd.Ohio Supreme Court · 1983
  3. Schenkolewski v. Cleveland Metroparks SystemOhio Supreme Court · 1981
  4. Marrek v. Cleveland Metroparks Board of CommissionersOhio Supreme Court · 1984
  5. Dickerhoof v. City of CantonOhio Supreme Court · 1983

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

3Cited by40 opinions

  1. Burr v. Board of County CommissionersOhio Supreme Court · 1986
  2. Wallace v. Ohio Dept. of CommerceOhio Supreme Court · 2002
  3. Doe v. Trumbull County Children Services BoardOhio Supreme Court · 1986
  4. Heckert v. PatrickOhio Supreme Court · 1984
  5. Winwood v. City of DaytonOhio Supreme Court · 1988

35 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