In the case O’Donnell v. N.E. Ohio Neighborhood Health Servs., Inc., 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 108541, 2020-Ohio-1609, an Ohio appellate court held that a no specialized or technical knowledge needs to be presented in court for a jury to properly calculate back and front pay.
In this case, an employer terminated an employee on the spot after over 20 years of service and in contradiction to company policy. The employer claimed that it terminated the employee for insubordination while the employee claimed that such an explanation was pretext for age discrimination. After trial, the jury found for the employee and awarded back and front pay and punitive damages. The employer appealed arguing that back and front pay were wrongly awarded because the employee failed to present enough admissible evidence.
The Ohio appellate court held that expert testimony of specialized or technical knowledge is not required for a court to properly submit the issue of back and front pay to a jury. The Ohio appellate court reasoned that testimony about past salary and speculation of future employment are enough for a jury to rule on back and front pay.
To read this case, click here.
Authors: Matthew John Markling and the McGown & Markling Team.
Note: This blog entry does not constitute – nor does it contain – legal advice. Legal jurisprudence is like the always changing like the Midwestern weather. As a result, this single blog entry cannot substitute for consultation with a McGown & Markling attorney. If legal advice is needed with respect to a specific factual situation, please feel free to contact a McGown & Markling attorney