Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

Burr v. Board of County Commissioners of Stark County

491 N.E.2d 1101 (1986)

Case BriefRelatedOptions
From our private database of 28,700+ case briefs...

Burr v. Board of County Commissioners of Stark County

Supreme Court of Ohio

491 N.E.2d 1101 (1986)

Facts

Russel and Betty Burr (plaintiffs) adopted a 17-month-old baby, Patrick, from the Stark County Welfare Department (defendant). Caseworker Winifred Schaub (defendant) told the Burrs that Patrick was a nice, big, healthy baby, born at the city hospital to an unwed teenage mother who lived with her parents. According to Schaub, Patrick’s grandparents were mean to him and his mother unable to care for him, so she planned to move away for better employment and voluntarily placed Patrick for adoption. In reality, a 31-year-old mental patient with low IQ, mental deficiencies, and psychosis gave birth to Patrick at the state mental hospital, with the father unidentified but assumed to be another patient. In addition, Patrick suffered a fever at birth. That medical profile and parental history gave Patrick an increased risk of developing Huntington’s disease. The adoption division knew Patrick was developing slowly, had test records indicating low intelligence and risk of disease, and had placed him in two foster homes before the Burrs adopted him. By high school, Patrick developed a myriad of physical and mental problems eventually diagnosed as Huntington’s, with a life expectancy of eight-and-a-half years when developed in childhood. During his treatment the Burrs obtained a court order opening Patrick’s sealed adoption records, then sued the Board of County Commissioners of Stark County, the welfare department and its director, Logan Burd, and Schaub (defendants). The Burrs sought medical expenses exceeding $80,000 and damages for fraudulent “wrongful adoption.” The jury returned a $125,000 verdict for the Burrs that was affirmed on appeal, prompting a further appeal to the state supreme court.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Celebrezze, C.J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 546,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 546,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 28,700 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 546,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 28,700 briefs - keyed to 983 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership