Chiancone v. Akron
2014 Ohio 1500
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- On June 18, 2006, Akron Fire Department lieutenant Richard Chiancone drove aggressively, struck vehicles on I-77, and a hunting rifle was reported missing from his home; he later surrendered and was jailed and charged with multiple felonies.
- After psychiatric evaluation, Chiancone was diagnosed with severe bipolar disorder and manic depression and alleges he notified City officials of his condition.
- Chiancone had recently been promoted to lieutenant subject to a 90-day probationary period; the City placed him on indefinite suspension July 10, 2006, later converted to a definite unpaid suspension and concluded he failed probation.
- Criminal charges were dismissed by the prosecutor with leave to re-file; by contrast, two other firefighters (Hullum and Jones) had grand juries find no probable cause in their cases.
- Chiancone sued under R.C. Chapter 4112 alleging disability discrimination; ADA claims were dismissed in federal court and the remaining state claim proceeded to the Summit County Court of Common Pleas.
- The trial court granted summary judgment for the City; Chiancone appealed, arguing pretext based on (1) alleged inadequate hearing/delay, (2) disparate treatment of Hullum and Jones, and (3) biased statements by decisionmakers. The appellate court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether City discriminated against Chiancone on basis of disability in disciplining him | Chiancone: discipline was pretext for disability discrimination — pointing to alleged disparate treatment, procedural delay, and biased remarks | City: placed employees accused of felonies on indefinite suspension as policy; Chiancone’s serious conduct provided legitimate nondiscriminatory reason; comparators not similarly situated | Affirmed for City: summary judgment proper; plaintiff failed to show pretext or that comparators were similarly situated |
Key Cases Cited
- Grafton v. Ohio Edison Co., 77 Ohio St.3d 102 (1996) (standard of de novo review for summary judgment)
- McGlone v. Columbus Civ. Serv. Comm., 82 Ohio St.3d 569 (1998) (intent is ultimate issue in state disability discrimination claims)
- Macy v. Hopkins Cty. Bd. of Educ., 484 F.3d 357 (6th Cir. 2007) (elements to establish prima facie disability discrimination)
- Manzer v. Diamond Shamrock Chem. Co., 29 F.3d 1078 (6th Cir. 1994) (three ways to show employer’s reason is pretext)
- Ercegovich v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 154 F.3d 344 (6th Cir. 1998) (standard for identifying appropriate comparators)