Published December 6, 2022 · Trials in the News

For more than five years, the family of Luke Stewart searched for accountability. A grand jury declined to bring criminal charges against the officer who shot him. A federal civil rights lawsuit was dismissed, and the United States Supreme Court declined to hear it. On November 1, 2022, a Cuyahoga County jury finally gave the family a different answer.

The jury found that Euclid police officer Matthew Rhodes acted recklessly and awarded Mr. Stewart's family $4.4 million in a wrongful death case brought under Ohio law. For families who have been told that a case against a police officer is hopeless, this verdict deserves attention.

What was reported

According to the Associated Press and News 5 Cleveland:

  • Luke Stewart, 23, was killed on March 13, 2017. Police said they found him asleep in a car in Euclid after a report of a suspicious vehicle.
  • The jury found that Officer Rhodes acted recklessly when he climbed into Mr. Stewart's car and shot him as the car drove away.
  • A grand jury had declined to bring criminal charges.
  • The family's federal lawsuit against the officer and the City of Euclid was dismissed. An appeals court agreed, reasoning there was no clearly established law barring the officer's conduct, and the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the case in May 2021.
  • Mr. Stewart's mother brought the wrongful death case in the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas.
  • The jury awarded $3.9 million for the loss of his support and companionship and $500,000 for his pain and suffering. It declined to award punitive damages or attorney fees.

The City of Euclid said it was "disappointed in the outcome of this trial" and evaluating its next steps. Mr. Rhodes's attorney said the jury's service was appreciated, but "sometimes you just disagree." The family's lawyers told Cleveland.com the verdict provided long-awaited accountability.

Why the state case could succeed when the federal case could not

The federal courts dismissed the family's civil rights case because, as the AP reported, they concluded there was no "clearly established law" barring the officer's conduct. That federal test is part of a doctrine known as qualified immunity. It is not the test Ohio law uses.

Ohio law asks a different question. Public employees in Ohio are generally immune from personal liability, but R.C. 2744.03(A)(6)(b) removes that immunity when the employee's acts or omissions were "with malicious purpose, in bad faith, or in a wanton or reckless manner." The Supreme Court of Ohio has described reckless conduct as "the conscious disregard of or indifference to a known or obvious risk of harm to another that is unreasonable under the circumstances." We discussed that standard last year in a post about the Supreme Court's decision on suing reckless government employees.

In other words, a family that loses in federal court on qualified immunity may still have a path under Ohio law, if the evidence shows recklessness. Our page on government and police wrongful death cases explains the rules in more detail.

Two kinds of damages in the verdict

The award had two parts that track Ohio's two claims after a death:

  • Wrongful death damages belong to the family. Under R.C. 2125.02, they can include loss of support, loss of services, loss of society and companionship, loss of prospective inheritance, and the survivors' mental anguish. The $3.9 million award for loss of support and companionship falls in this category.
  • Survival damages compensate for what the person who died suffered before death. That claim survives under R.C. 2305.21 and is brought by the estate. The $500,000 award for pain and suffering falls here.

Our guide explains the difference between wrongful death and survival claims. Earlier this year, a Marietta jury's verdict in a utility fire case was divided the same way.

No charges does not mean no case

This family heard "no" many times: from the grand jury, from the federal trial court, from the federal appeals court, and from the Supreme Court of the United States. The civil case under Ohio law was still there, and a jury of citizens found the officer's conduct reckless.

A decision not to prosecute is made under a demanding criminal standard. A civil jury applies a different standard and asks different questions. Our chapter on criminal and civil cases explains how the two relate.

A verdict is not always the last word. Post-trial motions and appeals may follow, and the city has said it is evaluating its options. But this family has been heard.

This article is general information about Ohio law, not legal advice about your situation. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Deadlines and rules change; talk to a lawyer about your family's situation.