Johnson v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as Johnson v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr., 2009-Ohio-7060.] 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 SYLVESTER JOHNSON Plaintiff v. OHIO DEPARTMENT OF REHABILITATION AND CORRECTION Defendant Case No. 2004-11040 Judge J. Craig Wright Magistrate Anderson M. Renick JUDGMENT ENTRY {¶ 1} On September 23, 2009, the magistrate issued a decision recommending judgment for defendant. {¶ 2} Civ.R. 53(D)(3)(b)(i) states, in part: A party may file written objections to a magistrate s decision within fourteen days of the filing of the decision, whether or not the court has adopted the decision during that fourteen-day period as permitted by Civ.R. 53(D)(4)(e)(i). If any party timely files objections, any other party may also file objections not later than ten days after the first objections are filed. Plaintiff timely filed an objection on October 7, 2009, and defendant timely filed an objection on October 19, 2009. {¶ 3} Plaintiff alleges that defendant was negligent in failing to provide him proper prescription medication to treat his psoriasis and that, as a result, he experienced severe symptoms of that disease while in defendant s custody. The magistrate found that to the extent plaintiff s claim concerns the professional skill and judgment used by the physicians who treated him, plaintiff asserts a medical Case No. 2004-11040 -2- JUDGMENT ENTRY malpractice claim that requires the introduction of expert testimony both to establish the requisite standard of care and to show that defendant s employees deviated from that standard of care. The magistrate further found that [b]ased upon the totality of the evidence, as well as plaintiff s failure to introduce expert testimony, * * * plaintiff has failed to prove his claim of negligence by a preponderance of the evidence. {¶ 4} In his objection, plaintiff argues that the magistrate erred in finding that his claim is one for medical malpractice. Plaintiff asserts that at a prior juncture in this matter, the Tenth District Court of Appeals held that his allegations do not constitute such a claim. See Johnson v. Dept. of Rehab. & Corr., Franklin App. No. 06AP-196, 2006-Ohio-6432. However, Johnson did not address whether plaintiff s claim is one for medical malpractice; instead, it pertained to whether defendant showed at the summary judgment stage that it is a hospital for the purposes of former R.C. 2305.11, which required that medical claims against, inter alia, hospitals be brought within one year after accrual. The appellate court merely held that due to defendant s failure to establish that it met the statutory definition of hospital, it was not entitled to summary judgment under former R.C. 2305.11. Accordingly, the magistrate was not precluded under Johnson from finding that plaintiff asserts a medical malpractice claim. {¶ 5} Defendant argues in its objection that the magistrate erred in not concluding that plaintiff s claim is time-barred under former R.C. 2305.11. Upon review, defendant s objection is not well-taken. {¶ 6} Upon review of the record, the magistrate s decision and the objections, the court finds that the magistrate has properly determined the factual issues and appropriately applied the law. Therefore, the objections are OVERRULED and the court adopts the magistrate s decision and recommendation as its own, including findings of fact and conclusions of law contained therein. 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. Case No. 2004-11040 -3- JUDGMENT ENTRY _____________________________________ J. CRAIG WRIGHT Judge cc: Emily M. Simmons Naomi H. Maletz Assistant Attorneys General 150 East Gay Street, 18th Floor Columbus, Ohio 43215-3130 Roger C. Stridsberg 7280 Royalgreen Drive Cincinnati, Ohio 45244-3525 RCV/cmd Filed December 14, 2009 To S.C. reporter December 29, 2009 James R. Rimedio P.O. Box 11358 Cincinnati, Ohio 45211
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
