The parents of a 5-year-old Cub Scout have sued Scouting America’s local council, a pack leader, another parent and a 12-year-old boy after the child suffered a serious broken leg during a Dec. 4 pack meeting in this northwest Ohio city.
The lawsuit, filed Feb. 19 in Lucas County Common Pleas Court, has become the main public test of what happened inside the Pack 422 meeting and whether adults in charge provided proper supervision. The case also carries added attention because Bowling Green police completed an investigation, presented it to the juvenile prosecutor and did not get criminal charges. That leaves the civil case as the clearest public route for sorting out the family’s allegations, the council’s response and the steps taken after the boy was hurt.
According to the complaint and interviews given by the boy’s parents, the injury happened during an indoor game with fake snowballs after the usual structure of the meeting broke down. Breanna Russell said the Scouts normally were separated by age, but not that night. She said her son bent down to pick up a snowball when an older boy hit him in the head, struck him in the stomach, knocked him down and stomped on his leg. “I didn’t see it happen. I was on the other side of the room, but I heard his yell,” Russell said in local television interviews. The family says the supervising pack leader had stepped outside at the time. The complaint says the adults in charge did not have enough supervision in place to keep younger and older Scouts apart, a claim that sits at the center of the negligence case.
The injury described in the filing is severe. The family says the child was taken to the hospital and diagnosed with a serious fracture of his right femur, the large bone in the thigh. The complaint says he underwent emergency surgery the next day and had flexible titanium elastic nails placed in the bone to stabilize it. It says he later needed a hip spica cast, pain medicine including morphine and follow-up care that includes physical therapy. Public comments from his parents add a picture of what that has meant at home. Christopher Russell said the boy has undergone two surgeries, now uses a wheelchair and has not returned to school because he needs help with the bathroom and other daily tasks. The complaint says the rods could remain in place for six months to a year. Whether the child will have permanent limitations remains an allegation, not a court finding.
What officials have confirmed is narrower than what the family alleges. Bowling Green police said the investigation is complete and that the case was presented to the Juvenile Prosecutor’s Office, which declined to pursue criminal charges. Police also said they referred the matter to Job and Family Services. Public reports reviewed so far do not explain why the juvenile prosecutor declined charges, and no detailed juvenile court record explaining that decision was described in those reports. Erie Shores Council, the local Scouting council named in the lawsuit, issued a statement saying its leadership has been in direct and ongoing communication with the family, has checked on the boy’s condition and has helped guide the insurance process. The statement did not address the complaint point by point. That leaves key questions unresolved in public, including exactly who saw the confrontation, what adults knew before it happened and whether any earlier conflict between the boys had been reported.
The case also turns on the gap between minimum adult presence and active supervision. Scouting America’s published safeguarding rules say two registered adult leaders age 21 or older are required for all Scouting activities, and they say adult leaders and youth members share responsibility for recognizing and reporting suspected abuse. The rules also say abuse issues must be reported to local law enforcement. The family’s lawsuit argues that even if adults were technically present, the supervision that night was not enough to protect a 5-year-old child during a mixed-age activity. The parents have also argued publicly that younger and older Scouts usually were kept apart, but that structure failed on Dec. 4. Their attorney, Chuck Boyk, said the incident was not reported for four days and framed that delay as part of a larger failure in how leaders responded after the boy was hurt. The family says the meeting began as an ordinary Cub Scout gathering and turned, in seconds, into a medical emergency with lasting consequences.
The complaint names Erie Shores Council Inc., Boy Scouts of America, pack leader Christopher H. Coakley, David A. Clark individually and as parent and natural guardian of the 12-year-old identified as L.C., and L.C. himself. The filing seeks more than $25,000 in damages, attorney fees and a jury trial. The claims listed in public accounts include battery, negligent supervision, negligence, vicarious liability, negligent infliction of emotional distress and consortium-related claims brought by the child and his parents. A March 2 press release from the family’s law firm said the case had been assigned to Judge Gary Cook. The next ordinary step in a civil case like this is service of the complaint and written responses from the defendants, which would show what facts they admit, deny or say they cannot yet answer. Public reports reviewed through Monday did not include detailed answers contesting the allegations point by point.
For the Russells, the case is about more than a single moment in a meeting room. Breanna Russell has described her son as a happy, energetic child who was proud to be in Cub Scouts before the incident changed daily life for the family. Christopher Russell has said ordinary tasks now require planning, lifting and close care because of the boy’s limited mobility. Boyk has cast the lawsuit in broader terms, saying parents who bring children to organized youth programs expect reasonable safety measures and proper oversight. The council, while expressing sympathy and saying it has tried to help, has so far spoken only in general terms. That split has shaped the public story from the start. The family is speaking in detailed, personal terms about pain, surgeries and supervision, while the public institutional response has remained brief and procedural as the case moves into court.
For now, the criminal track appears closed unless authorities revisit the matter. The civil case in Lucas County is moving ahead, and the next meaningful milestone will come when the named defendants formally respond and the allegations begin to be tested under oath and court rules.
Author note: Last updated March 9, 2026.