In Perry v. Eastlake (Feb. 16, 1996), 11th Dist. No. 95-L-111, 1996 Ohio App, the Court addressed the application of R.C. 955.28(B) to a dog bite scenario involving a police dog. In Perry, the plaintiff-appellant was attempting to hold the political subdivision liable under R.C. 2744.02(B)(5). In rejecting the plaintiff's-appellant's argument this court aptly reasoned that the dog bite statute does not contain any language expressly creating liability upon a political subdivision. In Perry, the appellant was the wife of a police officer. The officer's K-9 lived with the couple. Appellant let the dog outside to relieve itself. Upon returning inside the home, the dog retreated under the dining room table. When the appellant bent over to provide the dog with food and water, the dog bit the woman's face causing injuries. The appellant sued the city to recover for her injuries. The Court held that the decision to board the dog at appellant's house was a discretionary decision on how to use resources pursuant to R.C. 2744.03(A)(5).