Close Window

Public Employees Who “Aid And Abet” Discrimination May Not Be Entitled To Statutory Immunity

In the case of Johnson-Newberry v. Cuyahoga Cty. Child & Family Servs., 2019-Ohio-3655, an Ohio appellate court held that an employee who allegedly aided and abetted discrimination by a public employer is not entitled to statutory immunity.

In this case, a county employee brought legal action against the county, as well as the employee’s supervisor, for discrimination following the employee’s termination. In the response to the discrimination allegations, the supervisor argued that the supervisor was entitled to statutory immunity under R.C. 2744.03. The employee countered by arguing that Ohio’s discrimination statutes – and specifically R.C. 4112.02(J) – expressly impose civil liability on persons who “aid and abet” discrimination – which is an exception to statutory immunity under R.C. 2744.03(A)(6)(c).

The Ohio appellate court agreed with the employee finding that the public employee was not entitled to statutory immunity as R.C. 4112.02(J) expressly imposes civil liability on persons who “aid and abet” discrimination, which falls under the statutory immunity exceptions.

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 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.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.