In the case of Brady v. Youngstown State Univ., 2022-Ohio-353, the Ohio Tenth District Court of Appeals held that the trial court’s dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction of an employee’s administrative appeal from the State Personnel Board of Review (“SPBR”) regarding the employer’s decision to rescind the elimination of the employee’s position, which restored the employee to the employee’s former position, was proper because the SPBR’s adoption of the employer’s rescission was not subject to appeal.
Here, the employee argued that the SPBR’s order was an adjudication subject to appeal.
The Court reasoned that the SPBR’s order was not an adjudication as defined in R.C. 119.01(D) because the SPBR did not address the merits of the appeal – i.e., the SPBR merely adopted the employer’s rescission. The Court also concluded that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to hear the employee’s appeal under R.C. 119.12(B) because the SPBR’s adoption of the employer’s decision to restore the employee to the employee’s former position with any backpack due did not adversely affect the employee. Although the employee’s position was eliminated a second time, there was no record of an appeal of the second layoff.
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.