Cordray v. International Preparatory School , 128 Ohio St. 3d 50 ( 2010 )


Menu:
  • [Cite as Cordray v. Internatl. Preparatory School, 
    128 Ohio St.3d 50
    , 
    2010-Ohio-6136
    .]
    CORDRAY, ATTY. GEN., ET AL., APPELLANTS, v. INTERNATIONAL
    PREPARATORY SCHOOL ET AL.; SHABAZZ, APPELLEE.
    [Cite as Cordray v. Internatl. Preparatory School,
    
    128 Ohio St.3d 50
    , 
    2010-Ohio-6136
    .]
    The treasurer of a community school is a public official and may be strictly liable
    to the state for the loss of public funds.
    (No. 2009-1418 — Submitted April 21, 2010 — Decided December 20, 2010.)
    APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County, No. 91912,
    
    2009-Ohio-2364
    .
    __________________
    PFEIFER, Acting C.J.
    {¶ 1} This case stems from the demise of a community school formed
    pursuant to R.C. Chapter 3314. We address the issue of whether a treasurer of a
    community school is a public official who may be strictly liable to the state for
    public funds lost when the school accepted public funds that it was not entitled to
    receive. We hold that an officer, employee, or duly authorized representative or
    agent of a community school is a public official and may be held strictly liable to
    the state for the loss of public funds.
    Factual and Procedural Background
    {¶ 2} The International Preparatory School (“TIPS”), a nonprofit
    corporation organized under R.C. Chapter 1702, operated as a community school
    pursuant to R.C. Chapter 3314. Defendant-appellee Hasina Shabazz and her now-
    deceased husband, Da’ud Abdul Malik Shabazz, were members of the board of
    TIPS. Pursuant to R.C. Chapter 3314, a community school is operated by a
    governing authority, pursuant to a contract with a state-approved sponsor. TIPS
    was sponsored by the Lucas County Educational Service Center (“LCESC”). As
    a community school, TIPS received state funding based largely upon the number
    SUPREME COURT OF OHIO
    of students enrolled at the school as reported to the Ohio Department of
    Education. R.C. 3314.08.
    {¶ 3} On October 18, 2005, TIPS ceased operating as a community
    school. On October 20, 2005, the state petitioned the trial court for, among other
    relief, a temporary restraining order and the appointment of a receiver to secure
    TIPS’s assets. The trial court issued a temporary restraining order that same day
    and appointed a receiver in January 2006.
    {¶ 4} On January 30, 2007, the state auditor issued a report of an audit of
    TIPS for July 1, 2004, through October 18, 2005. The auditor determined that
    TIPS had improperly sought and received $1,407,983 from the Department of
    Education by submitting inflated enrollment figures. The auditor issued a finding
    in favor of the Department of Education against TIPS as an entity and against
    Shabazz and her husband individually. In her finding for recovery, the auditor
    stated:
    {¶ 5} “[TIPS] permanently closed and ceased its operation as a
    community school in October 2005. Between July 1, 2004 and October 18, 2005,
    [TIPS] was over funded by the Ohio Department of Education in the amount of
    $1,407,983, which was deposited into [TIPS’s] account. The Ohio Department of
    Education calculated the amount overpaid for the year ended June 30, 2005 was
    $361,446 and for the year ended June 30, 2006 was $1,046,537. Since [TIPS]
    was not eligible for these funds, the funds were due the Ohio Department of
    Education and should have been returned.
    {¶ 6} “In accordance with the foregoing facts, and pursuant to Ohio Rev.
    Code Section 117.28, a Finding for Recovery for public funds due the State that
    has not been remitted is hereby issued against [TIPS], Hasina Shabazz, Treasurer
    and the estate of Da’ud Abdul Malik [sic], Chairman of the Board of Trustees,
    jointly and severally, and in favor of the Ohio Department of Education in the
    amount of $1,407,983.”
    2
    January Term, 2010
    {¶ 7} R.C. 117.28 and 117.36 authorize the state to institute a civil action
    to reduce to judgment any audit findings that show the misuse of public funds.
    On August 3, 2007, the state filed an amended complaint against Shabazz and her
    husband’s estate. In her answer to the complaint, Shabazz claimed to have been
    “treasurer of the International Preparatory School Corporate Board,” and she
    continues to argue before this court that she was not the treasurer of the school,
    but treasurer only of the board of directors of TIPS.
    {¶ 8} Shabazz and the state filed cross-motions for summary judgment.
    Shabazz argued that two statutes shield her from liability: R.C. 1702.55, under
    which “members, the directors, and the officers of a corporation shall not be
    personally liable for any obligation of the corporation,” and R.C. 3314.071, which
    states that “[n]o officer, director, or member of the governing authority of a
    community school incurs any personal liability by virtue of entering into any
    contract on behalf of the school.” The trial court found Shabazz’s reliance on the
    statutes misplaced, found her personally liable for the public funds at issue, and
    granted the state’s motion for summary judgment against her.
    {¶ 9} Shabazz appealed to the Eighth District Court of Appeals. On May
    21, 2009, the appellate court reversed the trial court’s summary judgment. The
    court held that Shabazz was not a “public official” under the ordinary meaning of
    that term, and therefore could not be held personally, strictly liable for the
    overpayments to TIPS. Cordray v. Internatl. Preparatory School, Cuyahoga App.
    No. 91912, 
    2009-Ohio-2364
    , ¶ 31-35.
    {¶ 10} Further, the court held that since R.C. 3314.03(A)(1) mandated
    that community schools be established as nonprofit corporations under R.C.
    Chapter 1702, the officers and directors of community schools are protected by
    R.C. 1702.55. Id. ¶ 36. However, the court held that Shabazz could be liable if
    the state could prove that she had breached her fiduciary duty as a director of a
    publicly funded corporation or if the state could prove personal wrongdoing
    3
    SUPREME COURT OF OHIO
    sufficient to pierce the corporate veil. Id. at ¶ 41. The court thus held that there
    were genuine issues of material fact regarding whether Shabazz caused the
    improper payment of public money to TIPS, and it remanded the matter to the
    trial court.
    {¶ 11} The cause is before this court upon the acceptance of a
    discretionary appeal. Cordray v. Internatl. Preparatory School, 
    123 Ohio St.3d 1470
    , 
    2009-Ohio-5704
    , 
    915 N.E.2d 1253
    .
    Law and Analysis
    {¶ 12} That public officials are liable for the public funds they control is
    firmly entrenched in Ohio law. In Crane Twp. ex rel. Stalter v. Secoy (1921), 
    103 Ohio St. 258
    , 259-260, 
    132 N.E. 851
    , this court stated that it is “pretty well settled
    under the American system of government that a public office is a public trust,
    and that public property and public money in the hands of or under the control of
    such officer or officers constitute a trust fund, for which the official as trustee
    should be held responsible to the same degree as the trustee of a private trust
    fund.”
    {¶ 13} In Seward v. Natl. Surety Co. (1929), 
    120 Ohio St. 47
    , 49, 
    165 N.E. 537
    , this court stated, “It has been the general policy, not only with
    government employees and appointees, but with state officers, county officers,
    township officers, and all other public officials, to hold the public official
    accountable for the moneys that come into his hands * * *.”
    {¶ 14} The liability for public officials is strict: “Over the years, this court
    has held public officials liable for the loss of public funds, even though illegal or
    otherwise blameworthy acts on their part were not the proximate cause of the loss
    of public funds.” State v. Herbert (1976), 
    49 Ohio St.2d 88
    , 96, 
    3 O.O.3d 51
    , 
    358 N.E.2d 1090
    .
    {¶ 15} Although, as this court stated in Herbert, applying strict liability
    seems harsh, 
    id.,
     it is necessary from a public-policy standpoint:
    4
    January Term, 2010
    {¶ 16} “ ‘[I]t would be distinctly against public policy not to require a
    public officer to account for and disburse according to law moneys that have
    come into his hands by virtue of his being such public officer; that it would open
    the door very wide for the accomplishment of the grossest frauds if public
    officials were permitted to present as the defense, when called on to disburse the
    money according to law, that it had been (performed) or destroyed by some
    deputy, or other subordinate, connected with the public office.’ ” 
    Id. at 96-97
    ,
    quoting Seward, 120 Ohio St. at 50, 
    165 N.E. 537
    .
    {¶ 17} The state asserts that Shabazz, as treasurer of a community school,
    is a public official who should be liable for funds illegally collected by TIPS. In
    determining whether a community-school treasurer is a public official, we look to
    the Revised Code for guidance. R.C. 9.39 represents a codification of Ohio
    common law imposing strict liability on public officials for the loss of public
    funds with which they have been entrusted. The statute reads:
    {¶ 18} “All public officials are liable for all public money received or
    collected by them or their subordinates under color of office.”
    {¶ 19} R.C. 9.38(1) provides that for the purposes of R.C. 9.39, the
    definitions of “public official,” “public office,” and “color of office” are the same
    as those contained in R.C. 117.01. R.C. 117.01(E) states, “ ‘Public official’
    means any officer, employee, or duly authorized representative or agent of a
    public office.”
    {¶ 20} Thus, an officer, employee, or duly authorized representative of a
    charter school is a public official only if a community school is a “public office.”
    R.C. 117.01(D) defines “public office”:
    {¶ 21} “ ‘Public office’ means any state agency, public institution,
    political subdivision, other organized body, office, agency, institution, or entity
    established by the laws of this state for the exercise of any function of
    government.”
    5
    SUPREME COURT OF OHIO
    {¶ 22} Community schools fall within the definition of public office
    because they are entities “established by the laws of this state for the exercise of
    [a] function of government.” As this court held in State ex rel. Ohio Congress of
    Parents & Teachers v. State Bd. of Edn., 
    111 Ohio St.3d 568
    , 
    2006-Ohio-5512
    ,
    
    857 N.E.2d 1148
    , ¶ 32, community schools are legislatively created as a part of
    Ohio’s constitutionally required system of common schools:
    {¶ 23} “The Ohio Constitution requires establishment of a system of
    common schools. This requirement is grounded in the state’s interest in ensuring
    that all children receive an adequate education that complies with the Thorough
    and Efficient Clause. To achieve the goal of improving and customizing public
    education programs, the General Assembly has augmented the state’s public
    school system with public community schools. The expressed legislative intent is
    to provide a chance of educational success for students who may be better served
    in their educational needs in alternative settings.”
    {¶ 24} The General Assembly made clear in R.C. 3314.01(B) that
    community schools are public schools: “A community school created under this
    chapter is a public school, independent of any school district, and is part of the
    state’s program of education.” Thus, as entities “established by the laws of this
    state for the exercise of any function of government,” community schools are
    public offices pursuant to R.C. 117.01(D). In turn, an officer, employee, or duly
    authorized representative of a community school is a public official pursuant to
    R.C. 117.01(E).
    {¶ 25} Returning to R.C. 9.39, that statute provides that “public officials
    are liable for all public money received or collected by them or by their
    subordinates under color of office.” We have already determined that an officer,
    employee, or duly authorized representative of a community school is a public
    official. R.C. 117.01(A) defines “color of office”:
    6
    January Term, 2010
    {¶ 26} “ ‘Color of office’ means actually, purportedly, or allegedly done
    under any law, ordinance, resolution, order, or other pretension to official right,
    power, or authority.”
    {¶ 27} Under R.C. 117.01, public money received pursuant to the
    community-school-funding scheme set forth in R.C. 3314.08 would meet the R.C.
    9.39 element of “public money received or collected * * * under color of office.”
    Those payments were made by the state to TIPS due to the requirements of Ohio’s
    community-school-funding laws.
    {¶ 28} A factual question remains, however. In order for the state to
    establish Shabazz’s liability, it must show that she or her subordinates received or
    collected public money under color of office. Shabazz disputes that she was the
    treasurer of TIPS; she claims that she was the treasurer of the board of directors of
    TIPS. She claims that other people were hired as treasurer for the school, but also
    admits that she occasionally filled in as interim treasurer when the school lacked a
    treasurer.
    {¶ 29} The label “treasurer” is less important than the character of the
    position she held. We remand the matter to the trial court for a determination of
    whether Shabazz’s responsibilities at TIPS included the receipt or collection of
    public money, or whether she supervised employees who received or collected
    public money under color of office. We note that R.C. 3314.011 requires every
    community school to have a “designated fiscal officer,” whom the state auditor
    may require to be bonded.
    {¶ 30} Finally, we hold that R.C. 1702.55 offers no protection for public
    officials. Public officials are personally liable for public funds. Thus, R.C.
    1702.55, which protects members, directors, and officers of corporations from the
    debts of the corporation, does not protect public officials from liability for lost
    public funds. Liability attaches to a public official by virtue of the public office
    he or she holds. It is his or her own obligation to “account for and disburse
    7
    SUPREME COURT OF OHIO
    according to law moneys that have come into his hands by virtue of his being
    such public officer.” Seward, 
    120 Ohio St. 47
    , 50, 
    165 N.E. 537
    . Any liability that
    arises therefrom is not a corporate debt—it is the official’s own debt.
    Conclusion
    {¶ 31} Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the court of appeals that
    summary judgment was inappropriate, although for different reasons, and we
    remand the cause to the trial court.
    Judgment affirmed
    and cause remanded.
    LUNDBERG STRATTON, O’CONNOR, O’DONNELL, LANZINGER, and CUPP,
    JJ., concur.
    BROWN, C.J., not participating.
    __________________
    Richard Cordray, Attorney General, Benjamin C. Mizer, Solicitor General,
    Brandon J. Lester, Deputy Solicitor, and Todd R. Marti, Assistant Solicitor, for
    appellants.
    Brett E. Horton and Earle C. Horton, for appellee.
    Cloppert, Latanick, Sauter & Washburn and Sue A. Salamido, urging
    reversal for amicus curiae Ohio Education Association.
    Ulmer & Berne, L.L.P., and Donald J. Mooney Jr., urging reversal for
    amici curiae Ohio Federation of Teachers, Ohio School Boards Association, Ohio
    Association of School Business Officials, Buckeye Association of School
    Administrators, and Ohio Association of Public School Employees.
    Eastman & Smith, Ltd., Albin Bauer II, and Amy J. Borman, urging
    affirmance for amici curiae Imagine Charter Schools, Center for Education
    Reform, and Atlantic Legal Foundation.
    ______________________
    8