2019 Ohio 1991
Ohio Ct. App.2019Background
- Crystal Hester, pro se, sued Case Western Reserve University (CWRU) after her employment was terminated, alleging multiple claims; only defamation and tortious interference remained on remand from a prior appeal.
- Hester claimed CWRU published allegedly defamatory material from her personnel file to PNC Bank and the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, causing her to lose a PNC job and a Federal Reserve job offer.
- PNC hired Hester on March 25, 2013 and terminated her on May 3, 2013; she alleges the Federal Reserve declined her employment on or before March 7, 2013.
- Hester filed her complaint on April 3, 2015—more than one year after the alleged publications.
- The trial court granted summary judgment to CWRU, finding both claims time-barred and, alternatively, lacking evidentiary support that CWRU published defamatory material or improperly interfered with Hester’s employment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Hester's defamation claim was timely | Hester: claim arises from CWRU publications to third-party employers; seeks relief despite the filing date | CWRU: defamation governed by 1-year statute; suit filed after that period | Court: Defamation time-barred under R.C. 2305.11(A) (one-year) |
| Whether CWRU published defamatory statements to PNC or the Federal Reserve | Hester: CWRU placed defamatory material in personnel file and shared it with employers | CWRU: no evidence it communicated with PNC or the Federal Reserve about Hester; PNC attributed termination to performance | Court: No evidence of publication; claim fails on merits |
| Whether tortious interference claim is governed by the same limitations period as defamation | Hester: tortious interference pleaded as separate tort based on CWRU conduct | CWRU: claims arise from same conduct; defamation limitations govern or bar related interference claim | Court: Tortious interference is predicated on same conduct, thus likewise time-barred; fails alternatively for lack of evidence |
| Whether there was actionable improper interference with Hester’s employment at PNC | Hester: a CWRU employee interfered with an external employer causing job loss | CWRU: no contact or improper action toward PNC; PNC manager said termination due to performance | Court: No evidence CWRU knew of or interfered with PNC employment; summary judgment for CWRU |
Key Cases Cited
- Grafton v. Ohio Edison Co., 77 Ohio St.3d 102 (standard of review for summary judgment)
- Dresher v. Burt, 75 Ohio St.3d 280 (moving/nonmoving burdens on summary judgment)
- Am. Chem. Soc. v. Leadscope, Inc., 133 Ohio St.3d 366 (elements of defamation)
- Hecht v. Levin, 66 Ohio St.3d 458 (publication is essential element of defamation)
- T.S. v. Plain Dealer, 194 Ohio App.3d 30 (defamation claim accrues at first publication)
- Peterson v. Teodosio, 34 Ohio St.2d 161 (nature of claim determines applicable statute of limitations)
- Hambleton v. R.G. Barry Corp., 12 Ohio St.3d 179 (look to actual nature/subject matter to determine applicable limitations period)