Landers v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr.

Citations

• 223 N.E.3d 525
• 2023 Ohio 2857

Syllabus

With respect to a former inmate's claims that three former employees of the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections had used excessive force against him and caused him serious injuries, the Court of Claims of Ohio determined that only one of the three former employees was subject to personal immunity under R.C. 9.86. The plaintiff and the ODRC cross-appealed. Neither plaintiff nor ODRC challenged the court of claims' determination that the former employee who instigated the physical altercation with the plaintiff was not entitled to immunity, as he acted with a malicious purpose and in a wanton or reckless manner. The court of claims did not err with respect to the other former employee whom it concluded was not entitled to immunity. Competent, credible evidence supported the court of claims' determination that that employee knew or should have known that joining and furthering the attack on the plaintiff would create an unnecessary risk of serious physical harm. On the other hand, the court of claims erred as to the former employee whom it concluded was entitled to immunity under R.C. 9.86. That employee's status as a probationary employee did not render his actions other than wanton or reckless when he had undergone training in acceptable use of force and de-escalation techniques, and there was no evidence that the probationary employee was simply following the other officers' leads. There was no competent, credible evidence on which the court of claims could distinguish the probationary employee's conduct from that of the other former employees. None of the three former employees was entitled to immunity under R.C. 9.86. Judgment affirmed in part and reversed in part.