From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State ex rel. Carter v. Cleveland City School District Board of Education

Supreme Court of Ohio
May 15, 1985
17 Ohio St. 3d 105 (Ohio 1985)

Opinion

No. 84-1509

Decided May 15, 1985.

Schools — Bus drivers — Civil service — Mandamus proper remedy for reinstatement.

APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County.

Appellants, Janice Carter and Vernon Bentley, members of the classified civil service, were employed by appellee Cleveland City School District Board of Education as school bus drivers. In January 1983, appellants were removed from their positions on the grounds of tardiness, absenteeism and insubordination. Appellants filed timely appeals to the city civil service commission. However, the parties reached settlements when the appeals were before the referee for hearing. Appellants allege that pursuant to their settlement agreements, they were to resign on two conditions: (1) that appellees not oppose their claims for unemployment benefits, and (2) that appellants qualify for unemployment benefits.

Appellants applied for and were denied unemployment benefits. Appellants assert that appellees violated the settlement agreements by opposing appellants' claims for unemployment benefits. As a result, the conditional resignations of appellants are alleged to be void. Appellants brought an action in mandamus to compel appellees to reinstate appellants to their former positions and to pay them their full compensation due with interest from the time they were removed.

On September 11, 1984, the court of appeals dismissed appellants' complaint before a responsive pleading was filed. The court held that, "relators' application for writ of mandamus is denied. Relators have adequate remedy at law."

The cause is now before this court upon an appeal as a matter of right.

Lucas, Prendergast, Albright, Gibson Newman, W. Joseph Strapp Co., L.P.A., and W. Joseph Strapp, for appellants.

James G. Wyman, for appellees.


The issue before this court is whether appellants have a plain and adequate remedy at law. The facts demonstrate that appellants' civil service appeals were settled prior to hearing before the civil service commission. There is no decision from which appellants may perfect an appeal. Accordingly, appellants have no available remedy under R.C. 119.12 or 124.34.

In light of the fact the appellants' complaint was dismissed prior to the receipt of a responsive pleading, the complaint must be viewed as if the appellate court had entered judgment upon the pleadings. Thus, appellants would be entitled to have all the material allegations in the complaint, with all reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom, construed in their favor as true. Peterson v. Teodosio (1973), 34 Ohio St.2d 161 [63 O.O.2d 362].

Further, this court held in Williams v. State, ex rel. Gribben (1933), 127 Ohio St. 398, that mandamus was a proper remedy for the reinstatement of members of the classified civil service who had tendered their resignations upon certain terms and conditions which the appointing authority was found to have violated. The court stated at 400:

"If, then, the relators did not voluntarily relinquish their respective positions, but on the contrary were either wrongfully persuaded to tender their resignations, or were induced to do so upon certain terms and conditions relative to retention or succession specified by the director, or his authorized representative, by whose acts he is bound, who then failed to comply with those terms and conditions, and attempted to make such resignations effective contrary to the representation upon which they were obtained, as found by the Court of Common Pleas and the Court of Appeals, it follows that relators were wrongfully removed from their respective positions and are entitled to reinstatement; which right may be enforced by mandamus."

For the reasons stated above, we reverse the judgment of the court of appeals and remand the cause for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Judgment reversed and cause remanded.

CELEBREZZE, C.J., O'NEILL, LOCHER, HOLMES, C. BROWN, DOUGLAS and WRIGHT, JJ., concur.

O'NEILL, J., of the Seventh Appellate District, sitting for SWEENEY, J.


Summaries of

State ex rel. Carter v. Cleveland City School District Board of Education

Supreme Court of Ohio
May 15, 1985
17 Ohio St. 3d 105 (Ohio 1985)
Case details for

State ex rel. Carter v. Cleveland City School District Board of Education

Case Details

Full title:THE STATE, EX REL. CARTER ET AL., APPELLANTS, v. CLEVELAND CITY SCHOOL…

Court:Supreme Court of Ohio

Date published: May 15, 1985

Citations

17 Ohio St. 3d 105 (Ohio 1985)
477 N.E.2d 1134

Citing Cases

Woodruff v. Ohio Dept. of Transp

" The party against whom a Civ.R. 12(C) motion is made is entitled to have all the material allegations in…

State, ex Rel. Dwyer, v. Middletown

Appellant's argument based upon Williams that mandamus is the appropriate form of relief is strengthened by a…