McKinley v. Ohio Dept. of Pub. Safety

Inmate Assault, Rape, Negligence, Damages, Stipulation. Defendant stipulated that its employees breached their duty of care towards plaintiff after eight inmates entered plaintiff's cell, then assaulted and raped plaintiff for approximately 90 minutes before staff intervention. A trial was held on the issue of damages. The magistrate found that the testimony of plaintiff's treating physician, who also served as defendant's medical expert, was credible in that plaintiff's hip injuries were consistent with normal wear and tear, not an acute injury from the attack. The magistrate further found that plaintiff had proven pain and suffering damages from the attack and recommended an award of $175,000.00 in compensatory damages.

Civ.R. 56; motion for summary judgment; race discrimination; age discrimination; hostile work environment; retaliation. Defendant was entitled to summary judgment on plaintiff's claim that defendant unlawfully discriminated against her based on race and age because plaintiff could not establish a prima facie case of age discrimination and the evidence presented showed that defendant terminated plaintiff's employment for a legitimate, non-discriminatory purpose. Defendant was also entitled to summary judgment on plaintiff's claim for hostile work environment because none of the evidence showed that the alleged harassment that plaintiff experienced was based upon race or age. Finally, defendant was entitled to summary judgment on plaintiff's claim for retaliation because plaintiff could not establish a prima facie case of retaliation as plaintiff could not show a causal connection between her protected activity and the termination of her employment. Judgment for defendant.

Civ.R. 56, hostile work environment, constructive discharge. Plaintiff failed to produce a genuine issue as to any material fact that he was subjected to a hostile work environment based on his race or national origin, or that he was constructively discharged. The alleged hostile actions and commentary made by other employees were not racially based and did not materially disrupt plaintiff's work. As plaintiff's experiences amounted to no more than ordinary tribulations of the workplace, plaintiff's hostile work environment claims failed. For the same reasons, plaintiff failed to sustain his constructive discharge claim. Summary judgment was granted in favor of defendant pursuant to Civ.R. 56.

Public Records; R.C. 149.43(B)(1); R.C. 149.43(A)(1)(v); Adm. Code 5120-9-31(H); A public records request is superseded by a subsequent request that modifies the original request; Grievance records are exempted from the class of public records by R.C. 149.43(A)(1)(v) and Adm. Code. 5120-9-31(H); Kites are not grievance records within the meaning of Adm. Code. 5120-9-31(H).

Civ.R. 56; motion for summary judgment; University of Toledo Athletic Department; athletics; negligent misrepresentation; promissory estoppel; negligence; discretionary immunity. In an action where plaintiff was removed from University of Toledo's women's soccer team, the court found that defendant was entitled to discretionary immunity for the decision to remove plaintiff from the team. Defendant was entitled to summary judgment on plaintiff's claim for negligent misrepresentation because plaintiff failed to demonstrate that defendant supplied false information to plaintiff that the document plaintiff signed was a National Letter of Intent, and therefore, plaintiff failed to satisfy all the elements of the claim. Defendant was also entitled to summary judgment on plaintiff's claim for promissory estoppel because the court found that plaintiff's relationship with University of Toledo was contractual in nature, and therefore, the claim failed as a matter of law. Defendant was further entitled to summary judgment on plaintiff's claim for negligence as the court concluded that plaintiff failed to state a prima facie case for the claim since plaintiff pointed to no facts or supportive law that would allow the court to conclude that a duty of care existed to provide a safe team environment free from abuse, harassment, ridicule, embarrassment, and hostility. Judgment for defendant.