Cleveland city schools ruled not legally responsible for suicide of student.

Cleveland city schools ruled not legally responsible for suicide of student.

Cleveland city schools is not legally responsible for the death of an 11-year-old student whose family attributed his suicide to the use of a school-issued device, the Eighth District Court of Appeals ruled.

The father of Yaniel Rivera sued the Cleveland Metropolitan School District (CMSD). Victor Soler Jr. maintained that his son committed suicide in March 2022 after watching obscene and harmful videos on a district-owned device. CMSD argued it was immune from such lawsuits.

A Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court rejected the school district’s claim . In a recent opinion , the Eighth District reversed the lower court’s decision.

Writing for the Eighth District, Judge Michael John Ryan stated that the exception to immunity in R.C. 2744.02 didn’t apply. He said the family failed to demonstrate that it could prove there was a “physical defect” with CMSD’s software and monitoring of the software, and that any potential defect was “within or on the grounds” of CMSD, he wrote.

Wrongful Death Lawsuit Filed Against School District
Yaniel died from a self-inflicted gunshot wound. In 2024, Soler filed a lawsuit against CMSD for wrongful death and other claims. The complaint alleged CMSD’s internet safety policy indicated it used protective measures to filter access to “content that was obscene or otherwise harmful to minors” on devices issued to students in the school district. Despite the policy and alleged supervision and management of student devices, Yaniel, who was on the autism spectrum, was able to access harmful content on his CMSD-issued device.

In response to Soler’s lawsuit, the school district asked the trial court to dismiss the case, arguing it was immune as a political subdivision and the father failed to prove the district’s conduct was the direct cause of Yaniel’s death.

Soler countered that the exception in R.C. 2744.02 to political immunity applies, and a trial court had the right to determine whether the software failure constituted a physical defect. Soler maintained that the faulty oversight of the filtering software occurred in district-owned facilities, which means the defective filtering occurred within or on the CMSD grounds.

The trial court denied the district’s motion to dismiss, ruling that the court couldn’t “determine that it appears beyond doubt” that Soler’s claims couldn’t be proven.

District Appeals Trial Court’s Decision
CMSD appealed to the Eighth District, alleging the trial court should have dismissed the case.
The court analyzed state law to determine whether CMSD was immune. The opinion noted that under R.C. 2744.02(A)(1), “a political subdivision is not liable in damages in a civil action …caused by an act or omission…in connection with a governmental or proprietary function.”

However, the exemption under R.C. 2744.02(B)(4), specifies political subdivisions are liable in cases of negligence that “occurs within or on the grounds of and is due to physical defects of…buildings in connection with the performance of a governmental function.” Soler argued that this applied to the school district in the case of failing to monitor the filtering software.

The appeals court ruled that the failure of the software filter didn’t constitute a physical defect, as even Soler acknowledged, there was no removal, damage, or alteration made to the software filters. The court cited the Sixth District’s 2011 Hamrick v. Bryan City School Dist.to support its conclusion that “the misuse of or failure to monitor filtering software is not in and of itself a physical defect.”

The court also examined the gunshot injury’s proximity to school grounds. The Eighth District stated that it followed prior Ohio court decisions to interpret the phrase “within or on the grounds of the property” to mean the injury, not the negligent act, must occur on school property. Since Yaniel’s injury happened at home, the physical defect exemption did not apply, the court concluded.
The case was remanded to the trial court for further proceedings.

Judges Lisa B. Forbes and Eileen T. Gallagher joined Judge Ryan’s opinion.
Soler v. Cleveland Metro. School Dist.,2025-Ohio-2151.

Please note: Opinion summaries are prepared by the Office of Public Information for the general public and news media. Opinion summaries are not prepared for every opinion, but only for noteworthy cases. Opinion summaries are not to be considered as official headnotes or syllabi of court opinions. The full text of this and other court opinions are available online.

PDF files may be viewed, printed, and searched using the free Acrobat^® Reader
Acrobat Reader is a trademark of Adobe Systems Incorporated.