 |
|
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
McGowan v. Giles3/16/2000
JUDGMENT: APPEAL DISMISSED.
An accelerated appeal is authorized pursuant to App.R. 11.1 and Loc.App.R. 11.1. The purpose of an accelerated docket is to allow an appellate court to render a brief and conclusory decision. Crawford v. Eastland Shopping Mall Assn. (1983), 11 Ohio App.3d 158; App.R. 11.1(E).
In this accelerated appeal, plaintiff-appellant Harvey J. McGowan ( McGowan ), an attorney acting pro se, appeals from the granting of defendants-appellees Ms. Sumbra L. Giles ( Giles ) and Cuyahoga County Metropolitan Housing Authority's ( CMHA ) motion for summary judgment. For the reasons adduced below, we dismiss the notice of appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
The record on appeal indicates that Giles, a subordinate of McGowan, filed a complaint on October 14, 1997, with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ( EEOC ) alleging sexual harassment by McGowan. In return, McGowan, an officer with CMHA's security department, filed a complaint on October 16, 1997, against Giles with CMHA alleging that Giles was sexually harassing McGowan. On October 27, 1997, McGowan filed a defamation action against defendants-appellees. See Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Case No. 342909. Also on October 27, 1997, McGowan filed an action in federal district court alleging that defendants-appellees defamed him and committed sexual harassment against him. See United States District Court, Northern District of Ohio, Case No. 1:97CV2735.
Shortly after the reporting of the sexual harassment to the employer, CMHA transferred McGowan from his regular shift which included Giles (a dispatcher), to another shift where she would not be present.
On May 28, 1998, the State trial court granted defendants' unopposed motion for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Civ.R. 12(C) in case number 342909, with prejudice. See Journal Vol. 2220, page 519. On May 29, 1998, one day after the entry of judgment on the pleadings, McGowan filed his brief in opposition to the motion for judgment on the pleadings. On June 12, 1998, the State trial court entered a nunc pro tunc order which modified the dismissal of May 28, 1998, stating that the order of 5/28/98 is corrected to read defts motion for judgment on the pleadings filed 3/19/98 is unopposed and is granted as pltf has failed to allege the required elements of a common law defamation claim. Dis. w/o prejudice. See Journal Vol. 2227, page 187. In lieu of filing a direct appeal from that final order of May 28, 1998, McGowan refiled his Complaint in State court on June 2, 1998, again alleging defamation by defendants-appellees. See Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Case No. 356675. On June 19, 1998, the federal court granted defendants' unopposed motion for judgment on the pleadings as to the defamation claim, leaving only the claim for sexual harassment pending in the federal action. In granting judgment on the pleadings on the defamation claim, the federal court noted that: (1) McGowan alleged that he had been defamed by the employer changing his shift; (2) the defamation allegedly caused damage to his reputation; (3) short of a termination of employment,
On June 29, 1998, the EEOC issued its Determination relative to the complaint of Giles, finding that a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was demonstrated by Giles,
... in that she was sexually harassed due to her sex, female, by being disciplined and having a sexual harassment complaint filed against her in retaliation for complaining about sexual harassment.
Within the Conciliation Agreement accompanying the Determination relative to the complaint of Giles, and among the remedies provided under the Conciliation Agreement between G
Page 1 2 3 4 Ohio Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
|
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|