McGree v. Gateway Healthcare Ctr., L. L.C.
2019 Ohio 988
Oh. Ct. App. 8th Dist. Cuyahog...2019Background
- Simone McGree was employed by Gateway Healthcare Centre from February 3, 2016, until her termination on April 21, 2016. She had a prior (2014) workers' compensation claim against a previous employer for a back injury; she did not file any workers' compensation claim against Gateway and was not injured while working for Gateway.
- McGree sued Gateway, and two individual employees, asserting disability discrimination, wrongful termination, retaliatory discharge under R.C. 4123.90, wrongful termination in violation of public policy under R.C. 4123.90 et seq., and intentional infliction of emotional distress (the last was voluntarily dismissed).
- At trial the jury found for defendants on the disability claims but for McGree on the R.C. 4123.90 retaliatory-discharge and public-policy claims, awarding $71,300 compensatory and $142,600 punitive damages; the court later awarded attorney fees and costs.
- Defendants moved for directed verdict and later for JNOV or remittitur; the trial court denied those motions. Defendants appealed the denial of directed verdict and JNOV.
- The appellate court reviewed the legal sufficiency of the R.C. 4123.90 claims, concluded McGree had not pursued a workers’ compensation claim against Gateway nor been injured while employed by Gateway, and reversed the jury verdict and all damage/fee awards, entering judgment for defendants.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether R.C. 4123.90 protects an employee terminated for having filed a workers' comp claim against a prior employer | McGree argued her prior filing triggered R.C. 4123.90 protections and she was terminated in retaliation | Defendants argued R.C. 4123.90 only bars retaliation for pursuing claims against that same employer or for injuries that occurred while employed by that employer | Court held R.C. 4123.90 does not cover claims based on filings against a previous employer; reversal for defendants |
| Whether a plaintiff must have pursued a workers' compensation claim against the employer who terminated her | McGree relied on precedent that the statute protects pursuit of benefits, not ultimate allowance of benefits | Defendants emphasized the statute's language requiring the injury/claim to be "with that employer" | Court held the statute requires the claim to relate to an injury arising out of employment with the retaliating employer |
| Whether the jury verdict was legally sufficient to submit R.C. 4123.90 claims to the jury | McGree argued evidence (including termination timing and employer statements) supported submission | Defendants argued no evidence tied termination to pursuit of a Gateway claim | Court held evidence was legally insufficient and the directed verdict/JNOV should have been granted |
| Whether individual supervisors can be liable under R.C. 4123.90 | McGree kept individual defendants in the case and sought to hold them liable | Defendants contended statutory remedy is against employer, not individuals | Court noted precedent barring individual liability under R.C. 4123.90 and found those claims inapplicable |
Key Cases Cited
- Bennett v. Admr., Ohio Bur. of Workers' Comp., 134 Ohio St.3d 329 (Ohio 2012) (standard of review for directed verdict is de novo)
- Link v. FirstEnergy Corp., 147 Ohio St.3d 285 (Ohio 2016) (standard of review and legal sufficiency for JNOV)
- Bickers v. W. & S. Life Ins. Co., 116 Ohio St.3d 351 (Ohio 2007) (R.C. 4123.90 provides exclusive remedy for retaliation under Workers' Compensation Act)
- Sutton v. Tomco Machining, Inc., 129 Ohio St.3d 153 (Ohio 2011) (statute does not expressly protect injured employees before they file a claim; court recognized a limited exception)
- Onderko v. Sierra Lobo, Inc., 148 Ohio St.3d 156 (Ohio 2016) (statute hinges on pursuit of benefits, not award; but claimant must have pursued a claim for an injury ‘‘with that employer’’)