 |
|
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Seale v. Springfield8/9/1996
WOLFF, Judge.
Michael Seale appeals from a judgment of the Clark County Court of Common Pleas, which granted summary judgment to the city of Springfield, City Manager Matthew J. Kridler, and Fire Chief Donald J. Lee (collectively, "the city").
The pertinent facts and procedural history, as established by the record, are as follows. Seale was employed as a firefighter/ paramedic for the city from March 1988 to July 1991. On July 12, 1991, Matthew Kridler sent Seale a letter which stated that Seale's employment with the city was terminated, effective immediately, and outlined the reasons for his firing. The letter stated that Seale was fired for not having completed sufficient hours of continuing education to meet the minimum requirements for recertification as a paramedic, for placing a false signature on a Springfield Fire Division Class Attendance Record indicating that he had attended a continuing education program at Miami Valley Hospital when he had not, and for executing an Ohio Department of Education recertification application for paramedics which contained false information.
On July 12, 1993, Seale filed a complaint against the city based on religious discrimination in employment pursuant to R.C. Chapter 4112. Seale alleged that as a "non-Catholic" firefighter he had suffered disparate treatment by his Catholic supervisors and had been treated more severely than his Catholic co-workers for like infractions of department rules, and that such treatment eventually led to his discharge.
The city filed a motion for summary judgment on July 17, 1995. As evidentiary support for its motion, the city offered (1) excerpts from Seale's deposition, (2) an affidavit by Fire Chief Donald Lee, (3) the July 12, 1991 termination letter, (4) a letter to Seale dated September 16, 1991, from Bonnie Howell, the secretary of the civil service commission, informing Seale that the commission had decided to deny his appeal and uphold his dismissal, and (5) a copy of the August 8, 1990 written reprimand Seale had received from Lee for a fire engine accident in June 1990. Seale filed a response to the city's motion for summary judgment and offered excerpts from his deposition testimony and the July 12, 1991 termination letter as evidentiary support. Seale's complete deposition transcript was not made a part of the record in the trial court. In an October 5, 1995 entry, the trial court granted the city's motion for summary judgment.
Seale asserts one assignment of error on appeal.
"The trial court erred in finding that there were no genuine issues of material fact to be resolved and that defendant was entitled to judgment as a matter of law."
Seale contends that the trial court erred in granting the city's motion for summary judgment because the portions of Seale's deposition testimony referred to in the parties' summary judgment filings indicate that several genuine issues of material fact existed and, therefore, the city was not entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
Our review of the trial court's decision to grant summary judgment in favor of the city is de novo. Summary judgment is appropriate when the following have been demonstrated: (1) there is no genuine issue as to any material fact; (2) the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law; and (3) reasonable minds can come to but one conclusion, and that conclusion is adverse to the moving party, who is entitled to have the evidence construed most strongly in his favor. Van Fossen v. Babcock & Wilcox Co. (1988), 36 Ohio St.3d 100, 117, 522 N.E.2d 489, 505; Harless v. Willis Day Warehousing Co., Inc. (1978), 54 Ohio St.2d 64, 66
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Ohio Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
|
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|