State Ex Rel. Shisler v. Ohio Public Employees Retirement System

Ohio Public Employees Retirement System ("OPERS")—R.C. 145.38(B)(1)—R.C. 145.384—Reduction of health-insurance subsidy for a retiree reemployed by a state employer—Equal-protection claim—Civ.R. 12(B)(6) motion to dismiss—Retiree alleged sufficient facts to negate OPERS's argument that subsidy reductions for all OPERS-covered reemployed retirees are rational—OPERS's claim that it would incur additional costs in identifying retirees reemployed by an employer other than a state is not a sufficient rational basis requiring dismissal of retiree's complaint.

Mandamus—Labor relations—Public employees—R.C. Ch. 4117—State Employment Relations Board abused its discretion in dismissing public employee's unfair-labor-practice charge against employer because employer did not have authority to determine that employee's notice to arbitrate was untimely under collective-bargaining agreement—Board abused its discretion when it dismissed public employee's unfair-labor-practice charge against union without providing basic rationale for dismissal—Board did not abuse its discretion when it dismissed public employee's additional unfair-labor-practice charge against union, because union acted in accordance with public employee's waiver of union representation—Court of appeals' judgment granting writ of mandamus affirmed in part and reversed in part.

Workers' compensation—Temporary-total-disability compensation—R.C. 4123.56—Employee who had already been terminated for violation of employment policies before his shoulder surgery was not "unable to work" as "direct result of an impairment arising from an injury or occupational disease" under plain language of R.C. 4123.56(F) and thus was not entitled to receive temporary-total-disability compensation—Court of appeals' judgment reversed and writ granted.

Quo warranto—Mandamus—Appellants failed to challenge court of appeals' judgment dismissing their quo warranto claim on basis of laches and therefore waived that argument—Court of appeals' determination that appellants could not establish entitlement to city-council offices or that appellees were unlawfully holding the positions affirmed—Court of appeals' denial of request for writ of mandamus ordering continued payment of salaries and benefits as moot affirmed.