Ohio Appeals Court Concludes Firefighters Entitled to Immunity in Patient Restraint Incident

The Court of Appeals for Ohio’s Fifth Appellate District has reversed a lower court’s denial of summary judgment to several Mansfield first responders and the City of Mansfield, finding that the defendants are entitled to statutory immunity in a case arising from emergency medical treatment provided to a man suffering from a severe asthma attack.

The case stems from a March 2022 incident in which Robert McGuire experienced respiratory distress after inhaling a marijuana concentrate. As explained in the decision:

• On March 21, 2022, Robert McGuire experienced an asthma attack and shortness of breath and his inhaler did not give him any relief.
• McGuire admitted to inhaling a marijuana “dab” which is a concentrated form of cannabis earlier in the day, but claimed the asthma attack was triggered by a pine-scented candle.
• Emergency services were called and Williams, Price, Kendle, and Drum from the Mansfield Fire Department responded to McGuire’s residence.
• Williams was the only certified paramedic and in charge.
• McGuire received a Duo nebulizer and was loaded into an ambulance for transport to Ohio Health Mansfield Hospital, a Level 1 Trauma Center. Kendle drove the ambulance and Williams and Drum were in the back with McGuire.
• Price drove separately to the hospital. During the transport, McGuire showed signs of distress and became agitated and uncooperative.
• He kicked his feet, swung his arms, pulled the nebulizer mask off his face, and struggled with the firefighters in the back of the moving ambulance.
• Instead of continuing treatment, Williams and Drum had to subdue McGuire to ensure his safety.
• They could not administer an IV or place an oxygen mask on his face.
• Upon arriving at the hospital, Kendle exited the ambulance and observed Mansfield Police Officer Kaufman nearby; Kendle asked him for assistance.
• Kaufman observed McGuire struggling with Williams and Drum in the back of the ambulance.
• Kaufman decided to place McGuire in handcuffs so Williams and Drum could render care.
• McGuire was flipped over in a prone position so Kaufman could handcuff his arms behind his back; he was then placed back into a supine position.
• McGuire appeared not to be breathing.
• The decision was made to immediately take McGuire into the emergency department for emergency care.
• The time from when McGuire was unresponsive and not breathing to when emergency personnel administered a breathing treatment was one minute and forty-two seconds.
• The entire encounter from arrival to McGuire’s residence to taking McGuire into the emergency room was less than ten minutes.
• McGuire suffered injuries including cardiopulmonary arrest with consistent brain injury due to hypoxia and hypotension.

McGuire and his wife filed suit in March 2023, alleging willful or wanton misconduct on the part of the firefighters and police officer, vicarious liability against the City, and an independent claim for negligent hiring, training, and supervision. The trial court denied summary judgment, ruling that a jury should determine whether the conduct rose to the level that would defeat immunity.

On appeal, the Fifth District reversed. The court held that the immunity provisions of R.C. 4765.49(A) and (B) and R.C. Chapter 2744 shielded both the individual first responders and the City from liability, finding no genuine issue of material fact as to whether the conduct was willful or wanton.

The court emphasized that the firefighters provided DuoNeb treatment—identified by both parties’ medical experts as the standard of care—and promptly transported McGuire to the hospital. Their ability to provide further treatment was limited by McGuire’s combative behavior. Although internal reviews criticized certain actions and omissions, the court concluded that at most the firefighters’ conduct may have constituted negligence—not willful or wanton misconduct.

Similarly, the court found Officer Kaufman’s actions in handcuffing McGuire, consistent with department policy, were not wanton. Kaufman was unaware of McGuire’s respiratory condition and acted to assist paramedics in controlling an uncooperative patient so care could be administered.

As for the claims against the City, the court ruled that there was no basis for vicarious liability given that the employees were immune, and that Ohio law does not provide an exception to immunity for claims based on negligent hiring or supervision.

Accordingly, the appellate court reversed the trial court’s decision and entered summary judgment in favor of the defendants.

Here is a copy of the decision: