Robol v. Columbus
Citations
- 2025 Ohio 973
Syllabus
The trial court did not err in granting appellees' motion for summary judgment on appellant's claims related to appellees' implementation and enforcement of COVID-19 policies and protocols. The statute of limitations bars appellant's claims related to certain Columbus City Council meetings in 2020, and both the City of Columbus and individual employees of the city are entitled to immunity on appellant's intentional tort claims brought under state law. Appellant failed to demonstrate the existence of a genuine issue of material fact on his claims of infringement of his right to religious expression, deprivation of civil rights, infringement of his freedom of speech and of the press, violations of the Takings Clause, and conspiracy. Additionally, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in impliedly denying the motion to compel discovery by ruling on the motion for summary judgment, and we deny appellant's motion to take judicial notice. Judgment affirmed.
Judges: Edelstein
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.