|
|
Summers v. Village of Highland Hills7/29/1999
Pons v. Ohio State Medical Board (1993), 66 Ohio St.3d 619.
Here, R.C. 2506.04 governs administrative appeals and by its terms provides for de novo review. The trial court, therefore, used the appropriate standard of review and, accordingly, this assignment of error is overruled.
The second assignment of error states:
THE TRIAL COURT'S DECISION AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE VILLAGE OF HIGHLAND HILLS PERSONNEL BOARD OF REVIEW IS AGAINST THE MANIFEST WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE.
Summers argues that the decision of the Highland Hills personnel board of review is against the manifest weight of the evidence because no evidence exists to establish his purported insubordination or that he had been notified that misuse of the sick leave policy or that challenging a medical release could result in termination for a first offense.
Summers further asserts that the medical authorization demanded by the village violates his constitutional rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act which permits medical examinations and inquiries of employees in only limited circumstances. Claiming the authorization overly broad, Summers cites 42 U.S.C. 12112(d)(4)(A) which provides:
* A covered entity shall not require a medical examination * * * unless such an examination * * * is shown to be job-related and consistent with business necessity.
Highland Hills maintains that the court's decision is supported by a preponderance of substantial, reliable, and probative evidence because the village's return to work policy requires a medical examination and a medical authorization upon return from a medical leave of absence; further, the village asserts that Summers' position regarding his herniated disc in this case is contrary to the position he asserted in a pending civil action against his insurance carrier; and Highland Hills questioned Dr. Pogorelec's credibility following his indictment for drug law violations.
The issue then, for our resolution concerns whether the judgment of the court is supported by a preponderance of substantial reliable probative evidence or whether it is against the manifest weight of the evidence.
In C.E. Morris Co. v. Foley Constr. Co (1978), 54 Ohio St.2d 279, the Ohio Supreme Court stated in its syllabus:
Judgments supported by some competent credible evidence going to all the essential elements of the case will not be reversed by a reviewing count as being against the manifest weight of the evidence.
Thus, the central concern here becomes whether the refusal of Summers to provide a blanket medical release can serve as a basis for his termination from the police department for insubordination.
In Metzenbaum v. John Carroll Univ. (N.D. Ohio 1996), 987 F. Supp. 610, the court there considered a similar factual situation regarding release of medical records. Metzenbaum,
Page 1 2 3 4 Show All Case Laws Ohio PEO
|