# Suso v. Ohio Department of Development

> Ohio Court of Appeals · December 28, 1993 · 93 Ohio App. 3d 493

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3691017

## Case

- **Full name:** SUSO, Appellant, v. OHIO DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT, Appellee
- **Court:** Ohio Court of Appeals
- **Decided:** December 28, 1993
- **Citations:** 93 Ohio App. 3d 493; 639 N.E.2d 117; 1993 Ohio App. LEXIS 6257
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Bryant
- **Judges:** Petree, Bowman, Bryant
- **Cited by:** 11 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3691017

## Opinion text

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.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3691017. Public record. Not legal advice.