Columbus City Schools Bd. of Edn. v. Franklin Cty. Bd. of Revision (Slip Opinion)

The common pleas court did not abuse its discretion on R.C. 3319.16 appellate review when it affirmed the board of education's order terminating teacher's employment. Judgment of the common pleas court affirmed.

Common pleas court decision affirming resolution that terminated public school teacher's employment contract affirmed trial court did not abuse its discretion by concluding that teacher improperly asserted herself into a situation that was being handled by two others or by refusing to apply R.C. 3319.41(C) because there was no threat to others for the teacher to quell.

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.