Title: Yates v. Mansfield Bd. of Edn.

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

[Cite as Yates v. Mansfield Bd. of Edn., 99 Ohio St.3d 48, 2003-Ohio-2461.] 
 
 
 
YATES ET AL., APPELLANTS, v. MANSFIELD BOARD OF EDUCATION, APPELLEE. 
[Cite as Yates v. Mansfield Bd. of Edn., 99 Ohio St.3d 48, 2003-Ohio-2461.] 
Discretionary appeal allowed — Briefing to proceed to Proposition of Law No. I 
— Proposition of Law No. II allowed and cause reversed and remanded 
for further proceedings consistent with Hubbard v. Canton City School 
Dist. Bd. of Edn. — Political subdivision tort liability. 
(No. 2002-2242 — Submitted March 25, 2003 — Decided May 16, 2003.) 
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Richland County, No. 02 CA 27, 2002-
Ohio-6311. 
__________________ 
{¶1} 
The discretionary appeal on Proposition of Law No. I is allowed. 
Briefing is to proceed on Proposition of Law No. I. 
{¶2} 
The cause is allowed on Proposition of Law No. II.  The judgment 
is reversed, and the cause is remanded for further proceedings on Proposition of 
Law No. II consistent with Hubbard v. Canton City School Bd. of Edn., 97 Ohio 
St.3d 451, 2002-Ohio-6718, 780 N.E.2d 543. 
 
MOYER, C.J., RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON and 
O’CONNOR, JJ., concur. 
 
COOK, J., dissents. 
__________________ 
 
Robert J. Vecchio Co., L.P.A., and Robert J. Vecchio, for appellants. 
 
Lutz & Oxley Co., L.P.A., Fred M. Oxley and Erin N. Cahill, for appellee. 
__________________