# Johnson v. Administrator, Ohio Bureau of Employment Services

> Ohio Supreme Court · January 10, 1990 · 48 Ohio St. 3d 67

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6762171

## Case

- **Full name:** Johnson v. Administrator, Ohio Bureau of Employment Services
- **Court:** Ohio Supreme Court
- **Decided:** January 10, 1990
- **Citations:** 48 Ohio St. 3d 67; 549 N.E.2d 153; 1990 Ohio LEXIS 22
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Wright
- **Judges:** Brown, Douglas, Holmes, Moyer, Resnick, Sweeney, Wright
- **Cited by:** 2 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/6762171

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- reversing prior judgment in same case after rehearing and change in composition of court

## Opinion text

Wright, J.,
dissenting. I respectfully dissent as there is no reason to discard the holding that R.C. 4141.28 (O) vests jurisdiction over only those claimants who actually file appeals with our courts of common pleas. Likewise, neither R.C. 4141.28(0) nor (P) contemplates the form of “class action” embraced by the majority. As indicated by our previously reported opinion (see Johnson v. Ohio Bur. of Emp. Services [1988], 40 Ohio St. 3d 365 , 533 N.E. 2d 757 ), R.C. 4141.28(F) requires identification of the individuals represented and an indication of an agency relationship, both of which the majority concedes are lacking here. This is a classic case of an instance where hard facts have created bad law. Accordingly, I see no reason to overrule our previous decision.
Moyer, C.J., concurs in the foregoing dissenting opinion.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6762171. Public record. Not legal advice.