Background
Cincinnati College Preparatory Academy (CCPA) was a publicly funded community school that opened in 1999 to serve disadvantaged students in Cincinnati. From 2005 to 2013, Stephanie Millard served as CCPA’s designated fiscal officer — titled in her contract as both “treasurer” and “consultant” — during which time superintendent Lisa Hamm ran day-to-day operations. In 2009, the Ohio state auditor received an anonymous tip of credit card abuse and launched a special audit covering CCPA’s expenditures from 2006 to 2010, eventually expanding it to encompass nonpayroll disbursements and employee compensation.
The special audit produced more than 29 findings for recovery totaling $517,424 in misappropriated public funds. Among the documented abuses: over $60,000 in Christmas bonuses and gifts; a $30,000 one-day administrative retreat; unapproved trips to Spain, London, New York, and California that included concerts, Broadway shows, and sightseeing rather than professional development; spa services, prescription eyeglasses, and personal medical expenses charged to CCPA; landscaping and newspaper subscriptions at Hamm’s private residence; payments of property taxes and utility bills for Hamm’s private entities; and $400 in unauthorized bonuses paid directly to Millard. Subsequent yearly audits for school years 2010–2013 uncovered additional overcompensation and unapproved spending totaling tens of thousands of dollars more.
In 2019, the State filed suit under R.C. 117.28 and 117.30 seeking to reduce the audit findings to a monetary judgment against Millard, Hamm, and other CCPA employees. Millard answered, denied liability, and filed a third-party complaint against CCPA seeking indemnification under the CCPA Code. After contentious pretrial litigation over immunity, the statute of limitations, expert testimony, and Millard’s expunged criminal convictions, the case went to a jury. The jury found Millard jointly and severally liable for $392,847 in misappropriated public funds and ruled that CCPA had not breached its contract by declining to indemnify her. The trial court entered judgment accordingly, and Millard appealed on six grounds.
The Court’s Holding
The First District affirmed on all issues. The court’s central holding was that R.C. 3313.25(B)(1) — which shields treasurers of school district boards of education from personal liability — does not extend to fiscal officers of community schools. Because community schools are creatures of separate statutory authority and are not school district boards, the immunity provision by its terms applies only to traditional school treasurers, leaving community school fiscal officers fully exposed to personal liability for public fund misappropriation.
The court further held that the State’s claims were not time-barred under R.C. 2305.07’s six-year limitations period. On the evidentiary issues, the court ruled that Millard’s own opening statement — in which her counsel repeatedly told the jury that the prosecutor “passed” and never charged Millard — opened the door to otherwise inadmissible evidence of her expunged criminal convictions for unauthorized use of property. Having affirmatively invited the inference that no criminal charges were ever brought, Millard could not then prevent the State from correcting that misrepresentation at trial.
Regarding the state auditor’s audit procedures, the court found that the trial court’s rejection of Millard’s proposed jury instructions was within its discretion because those instructions were not concise, clear, or complete. The court acknowledged that the trial court erred by allowing a state auditor employee to give lay witness testimony about community-school funding mechanics, but deemed the error harmless because the same factual ground was independently established by other evidence in the record.
Key Takeaways
- Ohio’s treasurer immunity statute, R.C. 3313.25(B)(1), does not protect fiscal officers of community (charter) schools; only treasurers of traditional school district boards of education qualify for that shield.
- A defendant’s opening statement can “open the door” to admission of expunged convictions when counsel affirmatively — and falsely — represents to the jury that no criminal charges were ever pursued.
- The six-year statute of limitations under R.C. 2305.07 governs the State’s auditor-recovery actions and does not require each finding for recovery to be treated as accruing separately from the underlying conduct.
- Evidentiary error in admitting improper lay opinion is harmless where the same facts are established by other admitted evidence, including audit reports and witness testimony.
- A fiscal officer who serves as the financial gatekeeper of a community school — signing checks, maintaining accounts, and presenting financials to the board — can be held jointly and severally liable for misappropriated funds even if a superior directed the spending.
Why It Matters
This decision draws a sharp line between the legal protections available to traditional public school treasurers and those available to their counterparts at Ohio community schools. By holding that R.C. 3313.25(B)(1) immunity does not travel across that boundary, the First District removes a potentially significant litigation shield that community school fiscal officers might otherwise invoke to deflect personal liability for financial misconduct. The ruling reinforces that the public-funds accountability regime applicable to community schools carries real personal consequences for the administrators who control the money, regardless of whether a superintendent or board member directed particular expenditures.
The decision also provides a practical lesson on trial strategy: asserting in opening statement that prosecutors declined to bring charges — when in fact a guilty plea and expunged conviction exist — is an invitation to have that conviction introduced at trial. Defense counsel in public-fund cases who seek to emphasize the absence of criminal liability must be careful not to open doors that evidentiary rules would otherwise keep closed.