Nelson v. Univ. of Cincinnati
2017 Ohio 514
Ohio Ct. App.2017Background
- Nelson, an African-American assistant dean of administrative services (at-will), was hired at University of Cincinnati Clermont College in 2009 and reported to Dean Sojka with a dotted-line to Senior Vice Provost Qualls.
- In Sept. 2012 Nelson called David Cannon at the Ohio Board of Regents (OBR) about funding/subsidy concerns after receiving an internal email discussing funding-model changes.
- OBR staff called university officials describing the call as "unusual" and "bizarre;" university administrators (Qualls, Ambach, Johnson) treated the call as unauthorized and potentially circumventing the chain of command.
- Nelson was terminated without cause by Sojka in Oct. 2012; the college later reclassified the position and hired a white woman as director of business affairs with some different duties.
- Nelson sued the university alleging race and sex discrimination under R.C. Chapter 4112; after a bench trial the Court of Claims found for the university and this appeal followed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Nelson proved a prima facie case of race/gender discrimination | Nelson argued he was a protected person, suffered an adverse action, was qualified, and was replaced by a non-protected person (Keri) | University disputed discriminatory motive and emphasized legitimate non-discriminatory reason for termination | Court declined to decide prima facie question as outcome turned on ultimate burden; even assuming prima facie case, Nelson failed to prove discrimination |
| Whether university articulated a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for termination | Nelson argued the call did not justify termination and the explanation was pretextual | University said termination was for unauthorized, inappropriate contact with OBR that violated chain of command and damaged trust | Court held university met its burden of production; competent, credible evidence supported termination reason |
| Whether the proffered reason was pretext for discrimination | Nelson claimed the call’s content did not warrant firing, witnesses conflicted, and Cannon’s account undermined employer’s explanation | University maintained that regardless of content, Nelson lacked authorization and his conduct (calling OBR up the ladder) justified dismissal | Court found Nelson failed to prove pretext by a preponderance; differences in accounts did not establish discriminatory motive |
| Whether termination amounted to unlawful discrimination | Nelson urged the totality of evidence showed racial/gender animus | University maintained no evidence showed race or gender motivated decision; decision was based on conduct and managerial concerns | Court affirmed judgment for university: Nelson did not meet ultimate burden to show discrimination |
Key Cases Cited
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (established burden-shifting framework for indirect proof of discrimination)
- St. Mary's Honor Ctr. v. Hicks, 509 U.S. 502 (plaintiff retains ultimate burden to prove discrimination; disbelief of employer's reason is not conclusive)
- Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Prods., 530 U.S. 133 (prima facie case plus evidence discrediting employer's reason can permit inference of discrimination but is not always sufficient)
- Texas Dept. of Community Affairs v. Burdine, 450 U.S. 248 (articulation of employer's legitimate non-discriminatory reason shifts burden back to plaintiff)
- Eastley v. Volkman, 132 Ohio St.3d 328 (2012-Ohio-2179) (standard for manifest-weight review in Ohio)