Opinion

Suso v. Ohio Department of Development

  • 93 Ohio App. 3d 493
  • 639 N.E.2d 117
  • 1993 Ohio App. LEXIS 6257
Court
Ohio Court of Appeals
Filed
Dec 28, 1993
Status
Published
Author
Bryant
On the bench
Petree, Bowman, Bryant
Cited by
11 cases

The opinion

Peggy Bryant, Presiding Judge,

dissenting.

Being unable to agree with the majority opinion, I respectfully dissent.

As the majority notes, appellant’s supervisor, Bruce Smith, was found to be a classified employee. I find it difficult to conclude that, he being classified, appellant can be deemed an unclassified employee.

Decisions regarding the classification of persons in other positions at the Department of Development generally may not be relevant to appellant’s appeal;

*507

nonetheless, a decision of SPBR regarding her immediate supervisor cannot be ignored. Although consistency cannot always be achieved in decisions regarding all positions in the overall picture of state employment, consistency between appellant and her immediate supervisor is a desirable result. Whether or not the prior decision of SPBR regarding appellant’s supervisor Smith is actually made a part of the record on appeal, it is a public document whose facts reflect that a consistent approach to appellant’s and Smith’s cases necessitates a finding that appellant is a classified employee.

Thus, I dissent.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.