Ma v. Cincinnati Children's Hosp.

Excerpt

CONTRACTS — SUMMARY JUDGMENT — R.C. 2721.12: The trial court properly entered summary judgment in favor of plaintiff employee on plaintiff's declaratory-judgment claim that tenure entitled plaintiff to continued employment absent just cause for his termination, because plaintiff met his initial burden demonstrating that no genuine issue of fact existed, presenting extrinsic evidence from plaintiff and a witness on the committee that recommended him for tenure, and defendant did not meet its reciprocal burden demonstrating a genuine issue of fact existed for trial, failing to combat plaintiff's extrinsic evidence that tenure included just cause protection. [But see DISSENT: The trial court erred in entering summary judgment in favor of plaintiff on plaintiff's declaratory-judgment claim that tenure entitled plaintiff to continued employment absent just cause for his termination, because a genuine issue of fact existed for trial, both parties offering disputed evidence on whether plaintiff was an at-will employee at the time he was terminated]. The trial court erred in entering summary judgment in favor of plaintiff on plaintiff's declaratory-judgment claim that tenure entitled plaintiff to procedural-due-process protections because plaintiff did not meet his initial burden demonstrating that no genuine issue of fact existed, presenting only a vague statement in his affidavit that tenure entitled him to an opportunity to challenge the allegations against him. The trial court's order granting a declaratory judgment did not violate R.C. 2721.12(A), because defendant failed to establish how the declaratory judgment would affect the College of Medicine, and therefore, that the College of Medicine was a necessary party to the litigation, never asserting what "legally protectable interest" the College of Medicine maintained in the dispute.