Retaliation Cases

The trial court erred by entering summary judgment under Civ.R. 56 on appellant's claim of sex discrimination because the evidence did not eliminate any genuine issue of material fact regarding the comparability of three male co-workers who were allegedly treated more favorably by appellee, or regarding the validity of appellee's purportedly nondiscriminatory reasons for its comparatively less favorable treatment of appellant. Regarding appellant's claim of disability discrimination, however, the trial court did not err by entering judgment under Civ.R. 56. Appellant, who alleges that appellee terminated her employment because she was disabled, failed to present evidence sufficient to create a genuine issue of material fact with respect to her alleged inability to perform the essential functions of her position at the time of her termination. In addition, the trial court did not err by entering summary judgment on appellant's claim for retaliation, because appellant failed to present evidence sufficient to create any genuine issue of material fact with respect to the alleged causal connection between her engaging in protected activity and appellee's termination of her employment. Judgment affirmed in part and reversed in part.