Harter v. Chillicothe Long-Term Care, Inc., 2012 Ohio 2464

Appellants Susan Harter, Pamela Mullins, and Diana French sued Chillicothe Long-Term Care, Westmoreland Place, for multiple claims after leaving employment.
David Dixon, Westmoreland’s administrator, allegedly made numerous inappropriate sexual comments perceived as offensive by appellants.
Dixon’s alleged conduct included sexually explicit remarks, discussions of sexual acts, and objectification of female employees.
Appellants alleged Megan Cline’s hiring and待遇 created perceived favoritism based on appearance; Cline was marketed as a younger, attractive employee.
Appellants never complained during employment and did not use the bypass grievance mechanism despite a corporate compliance manual.
The trial court granted summary judgment to Appellees on all claims, and the appellate court affirmed, ruling the conduct was not severe or pervasive and not actionable, nor did it show severe emotional distress.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was there a hostile-work-environment claim based on sex?	Harter et al. contended conduct was based on sex.	Dixon’s comments, though crude, were not sex-based discrimination.	No; conduct not severe or pervasive enough to alter terms of employment.
Did the alleged facts support a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress?	Sexual harassment can support IIED when extreme and outrageous.	Harassment failed to meet elements of extreme conduct and serious distress.	No; IIED claim failed as conduct not extreme and plaintiffs did not show serious distress.

Hampel v. Food Ingredients Specialties, Inc., 89 Ohio St.3d 169 (Ohio 2000) (hostile environment standard under R.C. 4112; discrimination requires conduct based on sex)
Faragher v. Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775 (Supreme Court 1998) (environment must be severe or pervasive to alter terms of employment; limits civility codes)
Harris v. Forklift Sys., Inc., 510 U.S. 17 (Supreme Court 1993) (context for determining when conduct is sufficiently abusive)