Chubb v. Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation (Sept. 26, 1996), Franklin App. No. 96APE03-292, unreported, 1996 WL 550336. The estoppel doctrine, as it relates to civil service disputes, is a hybrid of the concepts of estoppel and waiver; an employee who knowingly accepts the benefits of an appointment to an unclassified position should be estopped from denying his or her unclassified status to gain the protections of the classified service.

Chubb v. Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation (Sept. 26, 1996), Franklin App. No. 96APE03-292, unreported, 1996 WL 550336. In order for the estoppel/waiver doctrine to apply, the employee must knowingly and voluntarily relinquish the protections of the classified service; the appointing authority need not demonstrate an employee's actual job duties fall within those of an unclassified position before it can have an employee estopped from denying his unclassified status.

Westfall v. Ohio Dept. of Commerce (Jan. 25, 1994), Franklin App. No. 93AP-1067, unreported, 1994 WL 21860. Where an employee accepted a position knowing it to be within the unclassified civil service, reaped the financial benefits of that position and maintained a responsible position of authority, he or she is estopped from later claiming that the position falls within the classified civil service. View Court of Appeals Decision | View Common Pleas Decision | View SPBR Order