Skip to main content

Bresler v. Rock

Ohio Ct. App.December 20, 2018No. 16AP-806Cited 5 times
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

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

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

DiscriminationRetaliation

Outcome

Jury returned verdicts in favor of defendants on plaintiff's age discrimination claim. Trial court granted directed verdict on retaliation claim and other counts, and denied plaintiff's motion for new trial on appeal.

Excerpt

Trial court did not err in providing jury instruction requested by appellees, nor did court err in ruling on appellant's request to pursue a claim for retaliation in age discrimination action.

What This Ruling Means

**Bresler v. Rock: Age Discrimination Case** This case involved an employee who sued his former employer, EveryWare Global, Inc., claiming he was discriminated against because of his age and then retaliated against for complaining about it. The worker, Bresler, believed the company treated him unfairly due to his age and then punished him for speaking up about the discrimination. The court ruled against the employee on all counts. A jury found that age discrimination did not occur, meaning they determined the employer's actions were not based on the worker's age. The judge also threw out the retaliation claim before it even reached the jury, deciding there wasn't enough evidence to support it. When the employee asked for a new trial, the court denied that request as well. This outcome highlights important challenges workers face when pursuing discrimination cases. It shows that employees must present strong, convincing evidence to prove both discrimination and retaliation occurred. Simply believing unfair treatment happened isn't enough – workers need solid proof that age (or other protected characteristics) was the actual reason for negative job actions. The case also demonstrates that retaliation claims require clear evidence connecting an employee's complaint to subsequent punishment by the employer.

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.