Hull v. Astro Shapes, Inc.
2011 Ohio 1656
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- Hull, employed by Astro Shapes since 1999, has COPD and back problems disclosed at hiring.
- Astro Shapes uses a no-fault attendance policy that awards points for unexcused absences but exempts FMLA absences.
- Hull pursued FMLA leave; three medical exams were conducted to determine if his condition qualified as a serious health condition.
- Astro Shapes denied Hull's FMLA leave after the third examination (Dr. DeChellis) deemed no serious health condition; Hull remained on provisional FMLA leave only for a period.
- Hull filed an OCRC charge (and EEOC dual-filed) alleging disability discrimination and FMLA interference; the state agencies found no probable cause; Hull filed suit in 2008 and was terminated in 2009 during the litigation.
- Trial court granted reconsideration in 2010, siding with Astro Shapes on summary judgment; Hull appeals the reconsideration and merits.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness and viability of FMLA/ADA claims | Hull argues FMLA/ADA claims were timely and actionable | Astro Shapes contends ADA time-barred; FMLA not properly pleaded | FMLA claim timely; ADA/ODL claim considered but not viable; held summary judgment proper on ADA and FMLA to extent raised. |
| Properness of trial court’s reconsideration of denial of summary judgment | Hull argues reconsideration was improper Civ.R. 60(B) motion | Astro Shapes contends reconsideration was permissible as interlocutory ruling | Reconsideration proper; denial of summary judgment is interlocutory and revisable; no abuse of discretion. |
| R.C. 4112.02 disability discrimination claim viability | Hull asserts disability discrimination under state law | Astro Shapes asserts Hull not disabled; no prima facie case | Hull failed to prove disability; no prima facie case; R.C. 4112.02 claim properly granted. |
| FMLA certification and second/third opinions process | Hull contested second/third medical examinations; process improper | FMLA permits second and third opinions when conflicting certifications exist | FMLA certification procedure followed; third opinion final and binding; no breach shown. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hood v. Diamond Products, Inc., 74 Ohio St.3d 298 (Ohio 1995) (defining prima facie elements and pretext framework for disability claims)
- Byrd v. Smith, 110 Ohio St.3d 24 (Ohio 2006) (standard for summary judgment analysis in civil cases)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (Supreme Court 1986) (material facts; summary judgment standard; evidence burden)