2020 Ohio 6843
Ohio Ct. App.2020Background
- Cindy Franta applied for STRS disability benefits in April 2014; STRS denied the claim and notified her of appeal rights in August 2014.
- STRS's August 18 letter set a 15-day deadline to file a written notice of appeal; STRS's August 29 confirmation explained appeal options and a September 29, 2014 deadline to submit additional medical evidence, request a personal appearance, or request a delay.
- Counsel notified STRS of representation (received Aug. 27) and STRS sent medical records to counsel on Sept. 5. Franta/counsel submitted additional medical evidence received Sept. 24. No timely request for a personal appearance was made by Sept. 29.
- The Disability Review Panel heard the appeal Oct. 15, 2014; STRS affirmed denial Oct. 16–17. Counsel later requested a rehearing, claiming he was not informed of the hearing; STRS denied rehearing as untimely.
- Franta filed a mandamus action (Apr. 2018) seeking a new hearing; the trial court granted STRS summary judgment April 10, 2020. Franta appealed to the Tenth District, which affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether STRS was required to provide notice of the specific date/time of the appeal hearing under Ohio Adm.Code 3307:1-7-05 | Franta: STRS had a duty to notify of the hearing date/time and denial without such notice violated the Administrative Code | STRS: It provided required confirmation and appeal options; it strictly enforces deadlines; no timely request for personal appearance was received | Court: STRS complied with the notice rule and enforcement of the deadline was proper; affirmed STRS |
| Whether STRS abused its discretion by refusing to reschedule when counsel claimed he was not informed of the hearing | Franta: Counsel was not informed and rehearing should be granted | STRS: Counsel received medical file (including the appeal confirmation) and failed to request a personal appearance by the deadline; strict deadlines apply | Court: No abuse of discretion; denial of untimely request was supported by some evidence |
| Whether the trial court failed to consider Franta's June 20, 2018 affidavit | Franta: Trial court ignored the affidavit | STRS: Trial court considered the affidavit | Court: Trial court explicitly cited and relied on the affidavit; claim without merit |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Hulls v. State Teachers Retirement Bd., 113 Ohio St.3d 438 (Ohio 2007) (mandamus available to review board's disability determinations)
- State ex rel. Pipoly v. State Teachers Retirement Sys., 95 Ohio St.3d 327 (Ohio 2002) (board's disability decisions subject to mandamus review)
- Kinsey v. Bd. of Trustees of the Police & Firemen's Disability & Pension Fund of Ohio, 49 Ohio St.3d 224 (Ohio 1990) (some-evidence standard for mandamus review)
- State ex rel. Nese v. State Teachers Retirement Bd. of Ohio, 136 Ohio St.3d 103 (Ohio 2013) (mandamus burden and evidentiary standards)
- State ex rel. Altman-Bates v. Pub. Emps. Retirement Bd., 148 Ohio St.3d 21 (Ohio 2016) (board decisions require some evidence)
- Smith v. McBride, 130 Ohio St.3d 51 (Ohio 2011) (summary judgment standard and Civ.R. 56 principles)