Rider v. Dir., Ohio Dept. of Job & Family Servs.
2017 Ohio 8716
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Linda S. Rider was employed by The Ohio State University as a senior program coordinator from Aug. 2013 until termination on June 22, 2015, after performance problems and placement on a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP).
- Rider filed for unemployment benefits; ODJFS initially allowed the claim but the director redetermined that the university discharged her for just cause.
- The Unemployment Compensation Review Commission reversed the director and found the university had just cause to terminate Rider; Rider’s request for further commission review was denied.
- Rider appealed to the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas, which affirmed the commission; she then appealed to the Tenth District Court of Appeals, proceeding pro se.
- Rider’s appellate brief failed to comply with App.R. 16(A)(7) and App.R. 12(A)(2): assignments of error were not argued separately and the brief lacked adequate citations to the 1,200-page administrative record.
- On the merits, the court found evidence in the record of insubordination and refusal to follow a written PIP, supporting the commission’s finding of just cause for termination.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Rider) | Defendant's Argument (University/ODJFS) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court should perform a "hybrid" review allowing new evidence not in the commission record | Rider argued the court should consider recordings and outside claims to discredit commission testimony | Defendants argued review is limited to the certified commission record per R.C. 4141.282(H) | Court: No hybrid review; limited to certified record — Rider's argument denied |
| Whether the court erred by not weighing Rider's other pending legal claims against university employees | Rider claimed those claims show appellees' testimony was perjured and should be considered | Defendants maintained unrelated claims are not part of the unemployment appeal record | Court: Such outside matters are not reviewable on appeal; argument without merit |
| Whether the commission erred by relying on reasons other than violations of law or published university policy to find just cause | Rider contended the commission failed to cite a law, code, or published policy violated by her | Defendants argued just cause may arise from conduct showing unreasonable disregard for employer's interests | Court: Just cause need not be violation of statute/policy; insubordination and failure to follow PIP suffice |
| Whether appellant’s assignments of error should be considered despite noncompliant briefing | Rider submitted a nonconforming brief with scant record citations and no separate argument mapping | Defendants relied on appellate rules permitting disregard of inadequately argued assignments | Court: Overruled assignments for briefing failures but reviewed merits and affirmed decision |
Key Cases Cited
- Janovsky v. Ohio Bur. of Emp. Servs., 108 Ohio App.3d 690 (2d Dist. 1996) (definition of "just cause" for dismissal includes unreasonable disregard for employer's interests)
- Peyton v. Sun T.V. & Appliances, 44 Ohio App.2d 10 (10th Dist. 1975) (traditional meaning of just cause explained)
- Petro v. Gold, 166 Ohio App.3d 371 (10th Dist. 2006) (appellant bears burden to demonstrate error on appeal)