Lipp v. Univ. of Cincinnati

Citations

• 2023 Ohio 1224

Syllabus

COVID-19 – CIV.R. 12(B)(6) – MOTION TO DISMISS – STANDING – R.C. 2721.03 – DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ACT – R.C. 3709.212 – R.C. 2905.12 – R.C. 3792.04 – VACCINATION – QUARANTINE: Where plaintiffs students failed to establish standing under both the common law and the Declaratory Judgment Act, the trial court did not err in granting a motion to dismiss plaintiffs' complaint that sought a declaratory judgment and injunctive relief and challenged four separate policies that the University defendant had issued in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The amended complaint failed to establish that plaintiffs suffered either an injury-in-fact or faced the significant possibility of future harm where it lacked any allegations that plaintiffs were injured in any articulable, particularized way by the University's vaccination, masking, and testing policies. Where three of the plaintiffs had been granted exemptions to the University's vaccination requirement, they were not denied the right to refuse medical treatment in the form of a vaccine and they suffered no injury. Plaintiffs lacked standing to asset a claim for coercion in violation of R.C. 2905.12 where they were either granted vaccination exemptions or voluntarily received a vaccination without seeking an exemption and where the complaint contained no allegation that any of the plaintiffs were ever knowingly exposed to COVID-19 or required to quarantine against their will. Plaintiffs lacked standing to assert a claim for a violation of R.C. 3792.04 where the University's policy did not require them to receive a vaccine and where the complaint contained no allegations that plaintiffs were forced to undergo COVID-19 testing or required to quarantine after being knowingly exposed to COVID-19.