Skip to main content

Thomson v. Boss Excavating & Grading, Inc.

Ohio Ct. App.October 21, 2021No. 20AP-263Cited 1 time
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Dorrian
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
appeal
State
Ohio
Circuit
10th Circuit

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Wrongful TerminationRetaliation

Outcome

The appellate court reversed summary judgment in favor of the employer, finding that the plaintiff established sufficient elements of a wrongful discharge claim based on public policy (prevailing wage protection), allowing the case to proceed to trial.

Excerpt

Trial court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of appellee employer in wrongful discharge in violation of public policy claim where clarity and jeopardy elements were met. The jeopardy element was met because the clear public policy articulated in R.C. Chapter 4115 protects not only the society's interest in supporting collective bargaining, but also the substantive right of employees to be paid prevailing wage, and the remedies available in R.C. Chapter 4115 are inadequate to protect such substantive right of appellant employee.

What This Ruling Means

# Thomson v. Boss Excavating & Grading, Inc. **What Happened** Thomson worked for Boss Excavating & Grading, Inc. and claimed the company wrongfully fired him in violation of public policy. Specifically, Thomson argued his discharge violated Ohio's prevailing wage law, which requires certain employers to pay workers a legally set minimum wage for public construction projects. **What the Court Decided** The appeals court reversed the trial court's initial decision and ruled against Thomson. The court found insufficient evidence to support Thomson's wrongful discharge claim. While the court acknowledged that prevailing wage laws protect workers' rights, it determined that Thomson had not presented enough proof that his firing was connected to these protections. **Why This Matters for Workers** This case shows that while Ohio law does protect workers who report prevailing wage violations or refuse illegal pay practices, workers must gather strong evidence linking their termination to these protected activities. Simply being fired is not enough—workers need to prove the employer fired them *because* they stood up for their wage rights. Without solid documentation, even legitimate complaints may not survive in court.

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.