[Cite as Wilson v. Allen Correctional Inst., 2009-Ohio-7191.]

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 

TIMOTHY W. WILSON 

 Plaintiff 

 v. 

ALLEN CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION 

 Defendant 

Case No. 2009-06966-AD 

Deputy Clerk Daniel R. Borchert 

MEMORANDUM DECISION 

FINDINGS OF FACT 

{¶ 1} 1) During April 2009, plaintiff, Timothy W. Wilson, an inmate 

incarcerated at defendant, Allen Correctional Institution (ACI), placed an order with a 

charitable group for food purchases as part of a fund raising activity. The food purchase 

order totaled $18.50. A flyer (copy submitted) advertising a fund raising event for 

September 2009 contained the disclaimer noting any inmates who were housed in 

security control (sc), disciplinary control (dc), or local control (lc) before or after placing 

an order would not be subject to receive their food purchase or be eligible to receive a 

refund. The actual disclaimer language on the flyer stated: 

{¶ 2} “[T]hose inmates going to SC/DC/LC or MASP before or after an order is 

placed will not receive their order and will not be issued a refund. Any inmate that is out 

of the Institution due to being AWL at the time of delivery will have his funds returned to 

his account.” 

{¶ 3} This disclaimer provided full notice to inmates in reference to certain 
Case No. 2006-03532-AD - 2 - MEMORANDUM DECISION

conditions occurring where they would be ineligible to either receive a food purchase or 

a refund. Although the submitted flyer was for a different fundraiser, defendant implied 

the flyer disclaimer language is representative of all fundraiser flyers including the April 

2009 event. 

{¶ 4} 2) Plaintiff recalled he voluntarily placed himself in a segregation unit on 

April 27, 2009 “out of fear for my personal safety.” While housed in segregation, plaintiff 

requested his food purchase authorization be nullified and he receive a refund of any 

funds withdrawn from his inmate account. On May 11, 2009, $18.50 was withdrawn 

from plaintiff’s inmate account to pay for his food purchase order. Plaintiff neither 

received the food purchase nor were any funds restored to his account. Consequently, 

plaintiff filed this complaint seeking to recover damages of $18.50, the amount 

withdrawn from his inmate account to pay for the food order he did not receive. The 

$25.00 filing fee was paid and plaintiff requested reimbursement of that amount along 

with his damage claim. 

{¶ 5} 3) Defendant acknowledged plaintiff placed a food order and his inmate 

account was charged $18.50 for food he ultimately did not receive. Defendant related 

“[t]he flyer for the fundraiser clearly stated no refunds would be given for inmates in 

segregation” and since plaintiff was voluntarily housed in segregation at the time he was 

ineligible to receive a food delivery or a refund. Defendant explained plaintiff had notice 

of the conditions of the fundraiser and voluntarily choose to make himself ineligible to 

receive his food order or a refund of funds paid. 

{¶ 6} 4) Plaintiff filed a response asserting ACI staff in the cashier’s office 

breached a fiduciary duty owed to him by not providing a refund for purchases made 
Case No. 2006-03532-AD - 3 - MEMORANDUM DECISION

Case No. 2006-03532-AD - 3 - MEMORANDUM DECISION

and not delivered. Plaintiff further asserted there is no rule under the Ohio 

Administrative Code authorizing defendant to withdraw funds from his inmate account 

after he requested his authorization to withdraw funds be voided. Plaintiff pointed out 

the fundraiser flyer submitted by defendant “does not come from the fundraiser 

concerned in this instant complaint, but rather from a fundraiser that happened 5 

months later.” Plaintiff argued “the language contained in the provided flyer has been 

(substantially) altered to change the scope and meaning of the word refund, as it 

pertains to these organized fundraisers.” Plaintiff did not provide a copy of the April 

2009 fundraiser flyer. Plaintiff did not dispute the fact that the same disclaimer 

language contained on the September 2009 flyer did not appear on the April 2009 flyer. 

Plaintiff stated “[i]f [d]efendant would have honored [p]laintiff’s legitimate request for a 

(cancellation) a refund would not be necessary.” 

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 

{¶ 7} 1) Prison regulations contained in the Ohio Administrative Code, “are 

primarily designed to guide correctional officials in prison administration rather than to 

confer rights on inmates.” State ex rel. Larkins v. Wilkinson, 79 Ohio St. 3d 477, 1997-

Ohio-139, 683 N.E. 2d 1139, citing Sandin v. Conner (1995), 515 U.S. 472, 481-482, 
Case No. 2006-03532-AD - 4 - MEMORANDUM DECISION

115 S. Ct. 2293, 132 L. Ed. 2d 418. Additionally, this court has held that “even if 

defendant had violated the Ohio Administrative Code, no cause of action would exist.” 

Williams v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. and Corr. (1993), 67 Ohio Misc. 2d 1, 3, 643 N.E. 2d 

1182. Accordingly, to the extent that plaintiff alleges that employees of defendant have 

failed to comply with internal regulations and the Ohio Administrative Code, he fails to 

state a claim for relief. 

{¶ 8} 2) Alternatively, considering defendant’s acts could be construed as a 

wrongful collection of plaintiff’s funds, plaintiff could still not prevail. Plaintiff is seeking 

to recover funds he asserted were wrongfully withheld; the funds sought for recovery 

represent a claim for equitable relief and not money damages. Consequently, this court 

at the Administrative Determination level has no jurisdiction over claims grounded in 

equity based on the wrongful collection of funds from an inmate account. See Flanagan 

v. Ohio Victims of Crime Fund, Ct. of Cl. No. 2003-01893-AD, 2004-Ohio-1842; also 

Blake v. Ohio Attorney General’s Office, Ct. of Cl. No. 2004-06089-AD, 2004-Ohio5420; and Johnson v. Trumbull Corr. Inst., Ct. of Cl. No. 2004-08375-AD, jud, 2005-

Ohio-1241; Norman v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. and Corr. (2008), Ct. of Cl. No. 2007-

09283-AD. 

{¶ 9} 3) Plaintiff’s claim is denied regarding the issue of a refund for the 

purchase price of the food. When plaintiff purchased the food he agreed to the terms 

and conditions of purchase which required his physical presence to accept delivery. 

Plaintiff’s lack of knowledge of the conditions for delivery is irrelevant to the issue of 

liability. Plaintiff failed to satisfy the condition of the purchase and has consequently 

waived the right to any refund of payment or receipt of the products purchased. See 
Case No. 2006-03532-AD - 5 - MEMORANDUM DECISION

Case No. 2006-03532-AD - 5 - MEMORANDUM DECISION

Bradsher v. Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, Ct. of Cl. No. 2003-

04627-AD, 2003-Ohio-4490; Thomas v. Warren Correctional Inst., Ct. of Cl. No. 2005-

07224-AD, 2005-Ohio-6586; Price v. Dept. of Rehab. and Corr., Ct. of Cl. No. 2006-

01017-AD, 2006-Ohio-7158; Hampton v. Chillicothe Correctional Inst., Ct. of Cl. No. 

2008-05419-AD, 2008-Ohio-7126; Conway v. Ohio State Penitentiary, Ct. of Cl. No. 

2008-07161-AD, 2009-Ohio-2414. 

 

 

 

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 
Case No. 2006-03532-AD - 6 - MEMORANDUM DECISION

TIMOTHY W. WILSON 

 Plaintiff 

 v. 

ALLEN CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION 

 Defendant 

Case No. 2009-06966-AD 

Deputy Clerk Daniel R. Borchert 

ENTRY OF ADMINISTRATIVE DETERMINATION 

 Having considered all the evidence in the claim file and, for the reasons set forth 

in the memorandum decision filed concurrently herewith, judgment is rendered in favor 

of defendant. Court costs are assessed against plaintiff. 

 

 ________________________________ 

 DANIEL R. BORCHERT 

 Deputy Clerk 

Entry cc: 
Case No. 2006-03532-AD - 7 - MEMORANDUM DECISION

Case No. 2006-03532-AD - 7 - MEMORANDUM DECISION

Timothy W. Wilson, #257-911 Gregory C. Trout, Chief Counsel 

P.O. Box 4501 Department of Rehabilitation 

Lima, Ohio 45802 and Correction 

 770 West Broad Street 

 Columbus, Ohio 43222 

 

RDK/laa 

12/11 

Filed 12/23/09 

Sent to S.C. reporter 4/16/10