Gradisher v. Barberton Citizens Hosp.
2011 Ohio 6243
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- Gradisher was terminated by Barberton Citizens Hospital for disciplinary-rule violations.
- He sued for breach of implied contract, promissory estoppel, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and age discrimination.
- The trial court granted summary judgment for the hospital.
- The court of appeals upheld the grant of summary judgment on all claims.
- The court addressed statutory age-discrimination standards, the IIED standard, and implied-contract/promissory-estoppel requirements.
- The case centers on whether assurances or representations created a non-at-will employment expectation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age discrimination prima facie evidence | Gradisher established a prima facie case via younger replacement | Hospital lacked evidence of younger replacement or adverse impact | No prima facie case; judgment for hospital affirmed |
| Intentional infliction of emotional distress | Discharge without warning was outrageous conduct | Termination alone is insufficient for IIED | Summary judgment for hospital affirmed on IIED claim |
| Implied contract and promissory estoppel | Evidence showed long-term expectations and favorable reviews | No written contract; no specific assurances of continued employment | No genuine issue; summary judgment for hospital affirmed on both claims |
| General employment-at-will doctrine | Employee handbook suggested non–at-will status | Acknowledgement and lack of signed contract negate non at-will status | At-will status preserved; implied contract/promissory estoppel not established |
Key Cases Cited
- Cozzuli v. Sandridge Food Corp., 2011-Ohio-4878 (9th Dist. 2011) (reiteration that termination alone does not establish IIED)
- Copley v. Westfield Group, 2011-Ohio-4708 (9th Dist. 2011) (rejected IIED liability for termination alone)
- Shetterly v. WHR Health Sys., 2009-Ohio-673 (9th Dist. 2009) (specific representations required for implied contract/promissory estoppel)
- Craddock v. Flood Co., 2008-Ohio-112 (9th Dist. 2008) (elements of implied contract; pretext standard in discrimination claims)
- Wing v. Anchor Media Ltd. of Texas, 59 Ohio St.3d 108, 570 N.E.2d 1095 (1991) (specific representations needed to modify at-will employment)