# Barker v. Scovill, Inc.

> Ohio Supreme Court · August 3, 1983 · 6 Ohio St. 3d 146

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6758069

## Case

- **Full name:** Barker v. Scovill, Inc., Schrader Bellows Division
- **Court:** Ohio Supreme Court
- **Decided:** August 3, 1983
- **Citations:** 6 Ohio St. 3d 146; 6 Ohio B. 202; 451 N.E.2d 807; 40 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1409; 1983 Ohio LEXIS 794
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Celebrezze
- **Judges:** Brown, Celebrezze, Holmes, Locher, Sweeney
- **Cited by:** 224 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- **Yellow flag:** Modified by Kohmescher v. Kroger Co., 61 Ohio St. 3d 501 (1991).
- Negative treatments: 1
- Distinguished by: 1
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6758069

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- applying the framework in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792, 93 S.Ct. 1817, 36 L.Ed.2d 668 (1973), to an age discrimination claim under Ohio law

## Opinion text

J. P. Celebrezze, J.,
dissenting. I respectfully dissent. An appellate court’s scope of review of the trial court’s factual determinations is limited to whether there is a substantial evidentiary basis for the determinations. See Gillen-Crow Pharmacies, Inc. v. Mandzak (1966), 5 Ohio St. 2d 201, 205 [ 34 O.O.2d 417 ]. Having examined the record, I believe there is. Hence the appellate court’s judgment should be reversed.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6758069. Public record. Not legal advice.