## Facts

- A minor child was enrolled without charge in a Head Start/daycare program operated by two nonprofit corporations, including Neighborhood Centers Association for Child Development (NCA).
- The program served low-income families and was funded primarily through government grants and private donations, not participant fees.
- The child was injured while participating in the program.
- The child’s parent sued the operators for negligence and sought tort damages.
- The defendants asserted the common-law doctrine of charitable immunity, claiming immunity from liability for ordinary negligence committed while performing charitable functions.

## Issues

1. Whether Ohio recognizes charitable immunity such that a charitable organization is immune from tort liability for negligence occurring in the course of charitable activities.
2. Whether summary judgment for the defendants was proper where it rested on charitable immunity.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Ohio abolished the doctrine of charitable immunity in Ohio.
- The court held that a charitable organization is subject to tort liability to the same extent as any other person or corporation.
- The court reversed the summary judgment for the defendants and the affirmance by the court of appeals.
- The case was remanded for further proceedings under ordinary negligence principles.

## Legal Principles

- Charitable status alone does not confer immunity from tort liability for negligence.
- Charitable immunity is an exception to the general rule that tortfeasors are accountable for negligent conduct and lacks sufficient modern justification.
- Modern tort policy favors compensation for injury and deterrence of negligent conduct; concerns about depletion of charitable assets are mitigated by contemporary risk-spreading mechanisms such as insurance.
- Summary judgment requires the movant to show no genuine issue of material fact; unsupported allegations are insufficient to defeat the motion, but a dispositive ruling cannot rest on an abolished immunity doctrine.

## Conclusion

Ohio eliminated charitable immunity and required charitable organizations to defend negligence claims under the same tort standards applicable to other defendants, making summary judgment improper where it depended solely on the former immunity.


Albritton v. Neighborhood Ctrs. Ass’n for Child Dev., 12 Ohio St. 3d 210, 466 N.E.2d 867 (Ohio 1984)