Wrongful Termination Cases

Trial court did not err by granting motion for judgment on the pleadings on claim for wrongful termination. Construing the material allegations contained in the complaint as true and in favor of appellant, the trial court properly concluded that appellant was a casual or day-to-day substitute teacher and thus was an at-will employee subject to termination with or without cause. Accordingly, the school district was entitled to judgment as a matter of law on appellant's wrongful termination claim.

Unemployment compensation/Whether quit with just cause

Employment termination

Cross-motions for summary judgment. Breach of contract claims. Wrongful termination claim. Ambiguous contract language.

Administrative Law, Just Cause, State Employee

employment at will doctrine - public policy exception - tort

Single joint employer doctrine retaliatory discharge sexual harassment/hostile work environment jury interrogatories plain error closing arguments

Workers' compensation-Violation of specific safety requirement-Industrial Commission did not abuse it discretion in granting additional award-Record contained evidence supporting commission's finding that specific safety requirement applied, that employer violated it, and that violation was proximate cause of injury-Whether worker disobeyed employer's instruction to stay out of hazardous area is immaterial.

Where the evidence and circumstances showed that company-wide demographic statistics were likely to prove relevant to a disparate impact claim (either to aid or damage the claim), such statistics were properly discoverable and summary judgment granted against claimants denied their discovery is reversed.

Trial court's determination regarding purported oral lease purchase agreement of mobile home is affirmed, particularly where there was testimony that appellants misrepresented the year of the mobile home.

In the absence of a genuine issue of material fact, the trial court did not err in granting summary judgment in favor of Miami Valley Hospital on Noelle Diller's claims of sexual harassment (hostile environment) and retaliation. While the trial court abused its discretion in striking Exhibits B, C, and D, attached to Diller's memorandum in opposition to MVH's motion for summary judgment, since the Exhibits were properly authenticated business records, the documents were either not in dispute, were otherwise part of the record, or were not relevant to the summary judgment decision, and the error was harmless. Judgment affirmed.