In re Lancaster, 128 N.E.3d 893

Lancaster, employed as a skip tracer at Cheek Law Offices (CLO) on the 12th floor of a secured 21‑story building, used her employee badge for building/elevator access but could not access offices on other floors.
On Oct. 18, 2016, Lancaster rode the elevator to the 21st floor during lunch, could not open an office door with her badge, was approached by Motorists Insurance personnel and a security guard, and was described by the 21st‑floor staff as evasive.
An administrative assistant (Powell) escorted Lancaster and invited her to visit again; Lancaster took photos and was given Powell’s phone number.
On Oct. 19, Lancaster returned to the 21st floor, was again approached by staff/security, and CLO’s general manager (Cheek) terminated Lancaster that day as a security risk for trespassing and being evasive.
Lancaster applied for unemployment benefits; ODJFS denied benefits, the denial was affirmed by the commission, and the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas reversed the commission.
The court of appeals affirmed the common pleas court, holding the record did not support a finding that Lancaster knew or should have known of a policy forbidding visits to other floors and that the commission’s conclusion was unreasonable given the essentially undisputed evidence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Lancaster was discharged for "just cause" (misconduct) disqualifying her from unemployment benefits	Lancaster: she lacked notice of any CLO policy prohibiting visits to other floors; she was invited/encouraged and Powell escorted her	ODJFS/CLO: Lancaster knowingly went to an unauthorized floor and was evasive when questioned, creating a security risk that justified discharge	Court held: No just cause — record lacked evidence Lancaster knew or should have known of any prohibition; commission’s conclusion unreasonable given undisputed facts

Tzangas, Plakas & Mannos v. Administrator, Ohio Bureau of Employment Services, 73 Ohio St.3d 694, 653 N.E.2d 1207 (Ohio 1995) (standard for reviewing "just cause" determinations and scope of judicial review)
Irvine v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 19 Ohio St.3d 15, 482 N.E.2d 587 (Ohio 1985) (reviewing court may not resolve witness credibility; sets context for "just cause")
Opara v. Carnegie Textile Co., 26 Ohio App.3d 103, 498 N.E.2d 485 (Ohio Ct. App. 1985) (agency rulings may be reversed when they reach an unreasonable conclusion from essentially undisputed evidence)