X hits on this document

PDF document

[Cite as Meyer v. United Parcel Serv., Inc., 122 Ohio St.3d 104, 2009-Ohio-2463.] - page 1 / 23

55 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

1 / 23

[Cite as Meyer v. United Parcel Serv., Inc., 122 Ohio St.3d 104, 2009-Ohio-2463.]

MEYER, APPELLEE, v. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC., APPELLANT. [Cite as Meyer v. United Parcel Serv., Inc., 122 Ohio St.3d 104, 2009-Ohio-2463.] Employment discrimination—Age-discrimination claim under R.C. 4112.99— Applicability of R.C. 4112.02 and 4112.14. (No. 2008-0315 — Submitted February 3, 2009 — Decided June 2, 2009.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Hamilton County, No. C-060772, 174 Ohio App.3d 339, 2007-Ohio-7063. __________________ SYLLABUS OF THE COURT

  • 1.

    An age-discrimination claim brought pursuant to R.C. 4112.99 is subject to the substantive provisions of R.C. 4112.02 and 4112.14.

  • 2.

    Pursuant to R.C. 4112.14(C), when the discharge of an employee has been arbitrated and the discharge has been found to be for just cause, the discharged employee is barred from pursuing an action for age discrimination.

__________________

CUPP, J. {¶ 1} This appeal requires us to consider the relationship of the several provisions of R.C. Chapter 4112 applicable to a statutory claim for age discrimination brought by an employee claiming that he was wrongfully discharged from employment. The primary issue is whether defendant-appellant, United Parcel Service, Inc. (“UPS”), is entitled to judgment as a matter of law on a claim of age discrimination brought by plaintiff-appellee, Robert Meyer. In particular, we must determine whether Meyer’s age-discrimination claim under R.C. 4112.99 is foreclosed by R.C. 4112.14(C), which provides that a wrongful-

Document info
Document views55
Page views55
Page last viewedMon Dec 05 05:41:22 UTC 2016
Pages23
Paragraphs382
Words7431

Comments