Matus v. Lorain County General Health District
707 F. App'x 304
| 6th Cir. | 2017Background
- Paul Matus served as medical director of Lorain County General Health District from 1991 until his discharge in 2013; his written employment agreement limited termination to for-cause with 30-days' notice.
- In late 2012 a board-ordered outside HR investigation into complaints about Matus’s comments to younger female employees concluded no sexual harassment but recommended sensitivity counseling.
- While the investigation was still open, Matus called the ex-husband of one complainant seeking information; the complainant reported the call and the board treated the call as serious misconduct.
- The board accused Matus of multiple acts of misconduct, held a pre-disciplinary hearing, and voted to terminate him for cause; Matus sued in state court asserting breach of contract and several tort and constitutional claims (later removed to federal court).
- A jury awarded $365,175.18 in economic damages (matching plaintiff’s expert) on the breach-of-contract claim and $0 economic plus $1,000,000 non-economic damages on the Ohio statutory retaliation claim; the district court reduced non-economic damages to $250,000 under Ohio statutory caps.
- On appeal the Sixth Circuit upheld the liability verdicts, agreed remittitur was required under Ohio law, but concluded the correct capped non-economic award was $350,000 and affirmed summary judgment dismissing Matus’s First Amendment claim.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of contract/for-cause protection | Matus: his employment agreement created enforceable for-cause protection entitling him to damages when terminated | Health district: medical director was unclassified public employee so civil-service protections void as against policy | Court: statutory text (O.R.C. § 3709.13) implies medical director is a classified employee; reasonable evidence supported breach verdict; JMOL denied |
| Ohio statutory retaliation (O.R.C. § 4112.02(I)) | Matus: his call to obtain information about an ongoing investigation constituted protected participation and was a but-for cause of termination | Health district: the call was not protected (not investigation participation) and was retaliatory misconduct toward complainant, justifying discharge for cause | Court: jury could reasonably find the call was participation in investigation, employer knew, and termination was retaliatory; JMOL/new-trial denied |
| Remittitur / statutory caps on non-economic damages | Matus: Ohio caps do not apply in federal court; alternatively cap should allow up to three times economic loss (here $350,000) | Health district: $1,000,000 excessive and duplicative; if cap applies political-subdivision cap $250,000 controls | Court: federal court applies Ohio substantive law; caps apply; non-economic damages limited to three times economic loss up to $350,000; remand to enter $350,000 on retaliation claim (vacating $250,000 reduction) |
| First Amendment retaliation (42 U.S.C. § 1983) | Matus: board retaliated for criticism of board competence and opposition to retire/rehire plan | Health district: speech either by brother-in-law (no standing) or made pursuant to official duties (not protected under Garcetti) | Court: no protected First Amendment activity by Matus (official-duty speech or lack of standing); summary judgment for defendants affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Braun v. Ultimate Jetcharters, LLC, 828 F.3d 501 (6th Cir. 2016) (standard of review for denial of JMOL)
- Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Leahey Constr. Co., 219 F.3d 519 (6th Cir. 2000) (apply forum state standard for sufficiency challenges in diversity cases)
- Posin v. A.B.C. Motor Court Hotel, Inc., 344 N.E.2d 334 (Ohio 1976) (Ohio standard construing evidence against movant on JMOL)
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973) (framework for prima facie retaliation cases)
- Greer-Burger v. Temesi, 879 N.E.2d 174 (Ohio 2007) (Ohio follows McDonnell Douglas for retaliation)
- Garcetti v. Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410 (2006) (speech pursuant to official duties not protected by the First Amendment)
- Arbino v. Johnson & Johnson, 880 N.E.2d 420 (Ohio 2007) (Ohio discussion of remittitur and statutory limits on damages)
- Palmer v. Fox Software, Inc., 107 F.3d 415 (6th Cir. 1997) (federal courts apply state substantive law in diversity cases)