In the case of Adams v. Parallel Employment Group., Inc., 2020-Ohio-6766, the Ohio Second District Court of Appeals held that the substitute teachers failed to establish that Parallel Employment Group, Inc. (“Parallel”) owed them a duty to provide compensation. Pursuant to R.C. 3319.10.
The substitute teachers argued that Parallel was required to compensate them pursuant to their contracts under R.C. 3319.10. The Court of Appeals disagreed.
The Court of Appeals noted that only a public official or agency would have a duty to provide compensation to these substitute teachers under RC 3319.10. In the present case, Parallel was a private corporation and, as such, the R.C. 3319.10 did not apply.
The Court of Appeals further noted that the substitute teachers provided no authority to substantiate their claim that R.C. 3319.10 applied to a private corporation like Parallel. Thus, the Court of Appeals held that no duty of compensation was owed by Parallel to the substitute teachers under R.C. 3319.10.
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 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