M.H. v. City of Cuyahoga Falls
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtPfeifer, J.
{¶ 1} The question before us is whether the city of Cuyahoga Falls is immune from liability, pursuant to R.C. Chapter 2744, in an action brought by a minor and his parents after the minor was injured at an indoor swimming pool maintained by the city. For the reasons that follow, we conclude that the city has not shown on its motion for summary judgment that it is entitled to immunity under R.C. 2744.02(A)(1), because under R.C. 2744.02(B)(4), a political subdivision can be held liable for injury caused by the negligence of its employees that occurred within the grounds of buildings used in…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Temple v. Wean United, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1977
- Cater v. City of ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 1998
- Hawsman v. Cuyahoga FallsOhio Court of Appeals · 2011
3Cited by79 opinions
- Argabrite v. NeerOhio Supreme Court · 2016
- Pelletier v. Campbell (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2018
- Esber Beverage Co. v. Labatt USA Operating Co., L.L.C.Ohio Supreme Court · 2013
- Transtar Elec., Inc. v. A.E.M. Elec. Servs. Corp. (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2014
- Marusa v. Erie InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 2013
74 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.