Ohio's 2021 Stand-Your-Ground Law and the New Immunity for Nonprofits: What Shooting Victims Should Know

Published January 28, 2021 · New Laws

On January 4, 2021, Governor DeWine signed Amended Senate Bill 175. Most of the coverage has focused on one headline: Ohio is now a "stand your ground" state. Less attention has gone to a second change in the same bill that matters just as much to anyone shot or wounded at a church, a lodge, a club, or a charity event.

The law takes effect on April 6, 2021. It is not in force yet, but families and survivors should understand now what it changes in civil injury cases, and what it does not.

Change one: no duty to retreat, anywhere you lawfully are

Since 2008, Ohio's "castle doctrine" has said that a person has no duty to retreat before using force in self-defense while in his own home or vehicle. Outside those places, the general rule required a person to retreat from a threat, if he safely could, before using deadly force.

S.B. 175 rewrites R.C. 2901.09. Beginning April 6, a person has no duty to retreat before using force in self-defense, defense of another, or defense of his residence "if that person is in a place in which the person lawfully has a right to be." The bill also adds a new division (C): the jury or judge deciding the case may not consider the possibility of retreat when deciding whether the person reasonably believed force was necessary.

Two points are important for injured people:

• The statute is written for criminal cases. By its terms, R.C. 2901.09 applies "for purposes of any section of the Revised Code that sets forth a criminal offense." It changes when a person can be convicted. How courts will apply it in civil lawsuits is a question that will be argued in the years ahead.
• It stacks on top of a 2019 change. Since March 2019, R.C. 2901.05(B)(1) has required the prosecution, once there is evidence supporting self-defense, to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did not act in self-defense. Put the two together and more shootings will end with no charge or no conviction.

Why "no conviction" does not mean "no case"

That is where civil law comes in. R.C. 2307.60(A)(1) gives "anyone injured in person or property by a criminal act" the right to recover full damages in a civil action. Last July, in Buddenberg v. Weisdack, 2020-Ohio-3832, the Supreme Court of Ohio held that this civil remedy does not require a criminal conviction. As the Court put it, "crimes can be committed without a conviction. They often are." I wrote about that decision in our post on Ohio's civil remedy for crime victims.

A civil case is decided by a different jury, under a different and lower standard of proof, and the shooter's "self-defense" story gets tested through sworn depositions, physical evidence, and witnesses. The prosecutor's decision not to charge is not the end of your claim.

There is one more civil rule to know. R.C. 2307.60(B)(2)(c) bars recovery by someone injured by a person acting in self-defense against that injured person's own felony-level or violent conduct. But the same division says the bar does not apply to an innocent bystander "who had no connection with the underlying conduct." If you were the person standing in the parking lot when the shooting started, that exception was written for you.

Change two: civil immunity for nonprofits that allow concealed carry

The second part of S.B. 175 amends R.C. 2923.126, the section that governs where concealed handgun licensees may carry. That statute has already given civil immunity to private employers, political subdivisions, and colleges and universities when a licensee brings a handgun onto their property.

S.B. 175 adds nonprofit corporations to that list. Under new division (C)(2)(d), effective April 6, a nonprofit "shall be immune from liability in a civil action" for injury, death, or loss allegedly caused by or related to a licensee bringing a handgun onto its premises, into a vehicle it owns, or to an event it organizes, unless the nonprofit "acted with malicious purpose." It is also immune for its decision to permit licensees to carry there. Division (G)(7) defines a "nonprofit corporation" as a private organization that is tax-exempt under section 501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code. That covers churches, fraternal lodges, veterans' halls, youth leagues, and most charities.

Who this hurts

Picture a fall festival on a church lawn in Kettering, or a fundraiser at a lodge hall in Huber Heights. A licensed carrier mishandles a pistol, or an argument escalates, and someone is shot. Before April 6, the family could ask whether the organization acted reasonably in how it ran the event. After April 6, if the injury was "caused by or related to" a licensee bringing a handgun, the organization is immune unless the family can prove malicious purpose, which is a very high bar.

That is a real loss for victims. The organization is often the party with meaningful insurance.

The paths that remain

The new immunity is significant, but it is not the end of every case.

• The shooter. The person who fired the gun remains personally liable, through a negligence claim for a careless discharge, a battery claim for an intentional one, and the R.C. 2307.60 civil remedy for a criminal act. No conviction is required.
• The shooter's insurance. Homeowner's and umbrella policies may cover an accidental or negligent discharge. Intentional-act exclusions are common, which is why the way a claim is investigated and pleaded matters from the start.
• Shooters who are not licensees. The new immunity speaks to injuries related to a licensee bringing a handgun. Where the shooter is not a licensee, the organization's ordinary duties under premises law remain in play. Our premises liability page explains those duties.
• Malicious purpose. The immunity does not protect an organization that acted with malicious purpose. Facts matter, and they have to be gathered early.
• Wrongful death and catastrophic injury. Families have their own claims, and our personal injury practice looks for every responsible party and every policy.

Watch the deadline

Shooting cases often carry a shorter clock than other injury claims. Under R.C. 2305.111(B), an action for assault or battery must generally be brought within one year. Other claims may have longer periods, but you do not want to be arguing about which one applies. Our guide chapter on deadlines and the timeline of an Ohio injury case explains the different limits.

What this means for you

If you or someone you love is shot or seriously injured after April 6 at a place run by a nonprofit, expect to be told that "the law says they can't be sued." That may be true as to the organization. It is not true as to the shooter, the shooter's insurance, or every other party whose conduct contributed. And if you were hurt before April 6, the new immunity was not yet in effect when you were injured. Either way, the evidence and the deadlines favor acting quickly, which is the point of our guide chapter on why you should talk to a lawyer early.