Skip to main content

McGinty v. Ohio State Univ.

OHIOCTCLJuly 29, 2020No. 2018-00026JD
Defendant WinOhio State Univ
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
McGrath
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Discrimination

Excerpt

Race discrimination, gender discrimination, R.C. 4112. Civ.R. 53, employment discrimination, reverse discrimination, gender, race. Plaintiff, a white male, brought claims for race and gender discrimination in violation of R.C. 4112. The case proceeded to trial before a magistrate. The magistrate recommended judgment in favor of defendant after finding that plaintiff failed to prove his claims for race and age discrimination by a preponderance of the evidence. Plaintiff filed two objections: (1) that the magistrate erred in concluding that plaintiff was not comparable to a black female employee, Bailey-Harris, who was treated more favorably than he was and (2) that the magistrate erred in concluding that plaintiff's termination was pretextual for unlawful discrimination. Regarding the first objection, the court determined that the magistrate did not err in concluding that Bailey-Harris was not comparable to plaintiff since plaintiff held a different position, had different job duties, had more experience, and was paid considerably more than Bailey-Harris. Regarding the second objection, the court found that the magistrate did not err in concluding that plaintiff's supervisor would have made the same decision to terminate plaintiff absent any impermissible bias against him because there was sufficient evidence revealing that plaintiff's supervisor had taken issue with plaintiff's performance and determined that he was not right for the position. Both of plaintiff's objections were overruled, and judgment was rendered in favor of defendant.

What This Ruling Means

**McGinty v. Ohio State University: Employment Discrimination Case** This case involved a white male employee who sued Ohio State University, claiming he faced discrimination because of his race and gender. The worker alleged this was "reverse discrimination" - meaning he believed he was treated unfairly because he was white and male, violating Ohio's civil rights law. The case went to trial, where a court official called a magistrate heard all the evidence. After reviewing the facts, the magistrate found that the employee could not prove his discrimination claims. The court ruled in favor of Ohio State University, meaning the employee lost his case and received no money damages. **What this means for workers:** This case shows how challenging it can be to win discrimination lawsuits in court. To succeed, employees must provide strong evidence that discrimination actually occurred - it's not enough to simply feel you were treated unfairly. Whether the discrimination claim involves traditional protected groups or claims of "reverse discrimination," workers need solid proof that their race, gender, or other protected characteristics were the real reason for negative treatment at work. Simply suspecting discrimination happened isn't sufficient to win in court.

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

More Rulings in This Case

Other orders and opinions in McGinty from the same court.

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.