[Cite as Hall v. S. Ohio Correctional Facility, 2010-Ohio-4302.]

Court of Claims of Ohio

The Ohio Judicial Center 

65 South Front Street, Third Floor 

Columbus, OH 43215 

614.387.9800 or 1.800.824.8263 

www.cco.state.oh.us

ERNEST HALL 

 Plaintiff 

 v. 

SOUTHERN OHIO CORRECTIONAL FACILITY 

 Defendant 

Case No. 2009-03274 

Judge Joseph T. Clark 

Magistrate Matthew C. Rambo 

ENTRY GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

{¶ 1} On June 21, 2010, defendant filed a motion for summary judgment 

pursuant to Civ.R. 56(B). Plaintiff did not file a response. The motion is now before the 

court on a non-oral hearing pursuant to L.C.C.R. 4(D). 

{¶ 2} Civ.R. 56(C) states, in part, as follows: 

{¶ 3} “Summary judgment shall be rendered forthwith if the pleadings, 

depositions, answers to interrogatories, written admissions, affidavits, transcripts of 

evidence, and written stipulations of fact, if any, timely filed in the action, show that 

there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to 

judgment as a matter of law. No evidence or stipulation may be considered except as 

stated in this rule. A summary judgment shall not be rendered unless it appears from 

the evidence or stipulation, and only from the evidence or stipulation, that reasonable 

minds can come to but one conclusion and that conclusion is adverse to the party 

against whom the motion for summary judgment is made, that party being entitled to 

have the evidence or stipulation construed most strongly in the party’s favor.” See also 
Case No. 2009-03274 - 2 - ENTRY

Gilbert v. Summit Cty., 104 Ohio St.3d 660, 2004-Ohio-7108, citing Temple v. Wean 

United, Inc. (1977), 50 Ohio St.2d 317. 

{¶ 4} At all times relevant, plaintiff was an inmate in the custody and control of 

defendant pursuant to R.C. 5120.16. Plaintiff alleges that “[n]urse Goodman gave me 

[too] much medication to make me fall down” and that Goodman assaulted him by 

telling him that if he filed a case against her she “will get Officer Chin to come in my cell 

and hit me in my face and back.” On March 11, 2010, the court dismissed plaintiff’s 

medical claim. Defendant now moves for summary judgment on plaintiff’s claim that 

Goodman threatened him with physical harm. 

{¶ 5} In support of its motion, defendant filed affidavits of Goodman and Chin. 

Goodman states: 

{¶ 6} “1. I am currently employed by the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation 

and Correction (DRC) as the Psychiatric Nurse Supervisor at [defendant]. 

{¶ 7} “2. I have personal knowledge, and I am competent to testify to the facts 

contained in this Affidavit. 

{¶ 8} “3. As part of my job duties, I interact with inmates under custody and 

control of DRC. I am familiar with [plaintiff]. 

{¶ 9} “4. I did not, on or about March 20, 2009, tell [plaintiff] that if he filed a 

law suit against me I would have Officer Chin come to his cell and hit him in the face 

and back with a PR-24 baton. 

{¶ 10} “5. Furthermore, I never threatened [plaintiff] in any manner at any point 

throughout his incarceration at [defendant], nor did I ever physically assault him.” 

{¶ 11} Chin states in his affidavit: 

{¶ 12} “1. I am currently employed by [DRC] as a Corrections Officer at 

[defendant]. 

{¶ 13} “2. I have personal knowledge, and I am competent to testify to the facts 

contained in this Affidavit. 
Case No. 2009-03274 - 3 - ENTRY

{¶ 14} “3. As part of my job duties, I interact with inmates under the custody 

and control of DRC. I am familiar with [plaintiff]. 

{¶ 15} “4. On or about March 20, 2009, I did not receive a request from Nurse 

Goodman to go to [plaintiff’s] cell and hit him in the face and back with a PR-24 baton. 

{¶ 16} “5. I have never received any request from Nurse Goodman to harm 

[plaintiff] in any manner at any point through [plaintiff’s] incarceration at [defendant], nor 

have I ever actually physically assaulted [plaintiff].” 

{¶ 17} Upon review, the court finds that the only reasonable conclusion to be 

drawn from the unrebutted affidavit testimony provided by defendant is that plaintiff was 

not harmed or threatened with harm by Goodman or Chin. 

{¶ 18} Civ.R. 56(E) provides in pertinent part: 

{¶ 19} “When a motion for summary judgment is made and supported as 

provided in this rule, an adverse party may not rest upon the mere allegations or denials 

of the party’s pleadings, but the party’s response, by affidavit or as otherwise provided 

in this rule, must set forth specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial. If 

the party does not so respond, summary judgment, if appropriate, shall be entered 

against the party.” 

{¶ 20} The court finds that there is no genuine issue of material fact and that 

defendant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Accordingly, defendant’s motion 

for summary judgment is GRANTED and judgment is rendered in favor of defendant. 

Court costs are assessed against plaintiff. The clerk shall serve upon all parties notice 

of this judgment and its date of entry upon the journal. 

 _____________________________________ 

 JOSEPH T. CLARK 

 Judge 

cc: 

 
Case No. 2009-03274 - 4 - ENTRY

Jennifer A. Adair 

Assistant Attorney General 

150 East Gay Street, 18th Floor 

Columbus, Ohio 43215-3130 

Ernest Hall, #224-414 

Warren Correctional Institution 

P.O. Box 120 

Lebanon, Ohio 45036 

MR/cmd

Filed August 11, 2010 

To S.C. reporter September 9, 2010