Skip to main content

Copen v. CRW, Inc.

Ohio Ct. App.June 18, 2018No. 17AP0016Cited 1 time
Defendant WinCRW, Inc.
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Hensal
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
appeal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Retaliation

Outcome

The appellate court affirmed the trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of CRW, Inc., finding that the plaintiff failed to establish retaliation or disability discrimination claims and that the employer had legitimate non-discriminatory reasons for the employment actions.

Excerpt

summary judgment, Civ.R. 56, App.R. 16(A)(7), disability discrimination, R.C. 4112.02, workers' compensation, retaliation, R.C. 4123.90

What This Ruling Means

# Copen v. CRW, Inc. - Plain English Summary **What Happened** An employee named Copen sued CRW, Inc., claiming the company retaliated against him and discriminated against him because of a disability. Copen believed the company treated him unfairly in response to filing a workers' compensation claim or reporting disability-related concerns. **What the Court Decided** The appeals court sided with the company. The court found that Copen did not provide enough evidence to prove retaliation or disability discrimination occurred. The court also determined that CRW, Inc. had legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons for its employment decisions about Copen—meaning the company could justify its actions without reference to his disability or workers' compensation claim. **Why This Matters for Workers** This ruling shows that employees must gather strong evidence to win discrimination or retaliation cases. Simply believing you were treated unfairly isn't enough; you need concrete proof connecting the employer's actions directly to your disability or complaint. Workers facing similar situations should document incidents carefully and consult with legal professionals early to evaluate the strength of their claims.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.