Legal Opinion

Garrett v. City of Sandusky

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided January 12, 1994No. 92-742PublishedCited by 64 opinions

1Per curiam

' Today we consider whether Mr. Garrett is entitled to pursue his wrongful death action against the city for the losses incurred as a result of his son’s death, which the city admits was caused by its own negligence. In order to avoid liability for its negligence at the Surfs Up wave pool, the city relies on R.C. 2744.01(C)(2)(u), formerly 2744.01(C)(2)(t), which states that a “swimming pool” is a “governmental” and not a “proprietary” function, and which the city contends exempts it from liability. This portion of the statute became effective three days before the Garrett child’s traumatic…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. State v. GrubbOhio Supreme Court · 1986

3Cited by64 opinions

  1. Wilson v. Stark County Department of Human ServicesOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Cater v. ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  3. McConnell v. Hunt Sports EnterprisesOhio Court of Appeals · 1999
  4. Butler v. JordanOhio Supreme Court · 2001
  5. Hill v. City of UrbanaOhio Supreme Court · 1997

59 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