In the case of Pagano v. Case Western Reserve Univ., 2021-Ohio-59, an Ohio Appeals Court held that granting summary judgment to a university was improper when a reasonable jury could find the university violated its tenure policy by not establishing clear criteria to award tenure to hybrid scientist candidates.
The university argued the employee’s credentials did not warrant receiving tenure. The employee claimed the university failed to set clear standards regarding the criteria for a hybrid scientist to obtain tenure. The Court of Appeals agreed with the employee.
The Court held that a reasonable jury could find that the school failed to set tenure criteria for the employee and other hybrid scientist candidates. The Court further reasoned it is possible that a lack of such criteria prejudiced the review of the employee’s application.
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.