7,250 employment law court rulings from public federal records (1863–2026)
Wrongful termination claims arise when an employee is fired in violation of federal or state law, public policy, or an employment contract. While most employment is at-will, employers cannot terminate employees for illegal reasons such as discrimination, retaliation, or exercising legal rights. These cases examine whether the stated reason for termination was pretextual.
Employers most frequently appearing in wrongful termination rulings.
Pursuant to its statutory responsibility under R.C. 2506.04, the common pleas court considered the entire record and evaluated all evidence as to witness credibility, the probative character of the evidence, and the weight to be afforded the evidence, and gave due deference to civil service commission's resolution of evidentiary conflicts in determining that commission's decision to terminate school district employee's emloyment was supported by the preponderance of reliable, probative, and substantial evidence. Employing the very limited and deferential standard of review afforded a court of appeals pursuant to RC. 2506.04, we cannot find that the common pleas court abused its discretion in so finding.
Summary judgment employer intentional tort R.C. 2745.01 negligence negligence per se.
The trial court did not err by granting appellee's motion for judgment on the pleadings. Appellant's complaint did not establish the elements necessary to support his claim for wrongful discharge in violation of public policy. Judgment affirmed. (Tucker, P.J., concurring.)
Appellant, a public employer, appeals from the trial court's denial of an application to vacate an arbitration award that sustained a grievance regarding a union member's employment termination. The arbitrator's interpretation of the relevant provision of the collective bargaining agreement was necessary to determine whether the termination was for just cause. Thus, the arbitrator did not exceed her authority by engaging in the contractual interpretation. Further, the arbitrator's factual conclusions were not a basis upon which the award could be vacated. Finally, the arbitration decision did not violate public policy. Judgment affirmed.
employer – employee – discipline – termination – Human Resource Commission – substantial, reliable, and probative evidence – hearing officer – missing page – presume regularity
Arbitration agreement motion for order compelling arbitration. The trial court erred where it denied appellants' joint motion to compel arbitration. Appellee's claims, under the terms of the operating agreement, fall within the scope of the arbitration clause.
In an administrative appeal following her termination from the fire department, appellant, as a fire trainee, was properly categorized as a probationary employee and was not entitled to appeal under the civil service commission rules. Home rule charter municipality collective bargaining agreement court rules extension.
Explore rulings by type of employment law claim.
Check which employment laws may protect you — free, private, and no sign-up required.
Data sourced from public federal court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes extracted using AI analysis. This information is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The classification of claim types is based on automated analysis and may not reflect the full scope of each case.