Horne v. Clemens (1985), 23 Ohio App.3d 139. A classified civil servant has a cause of action in an Ohio court of common pleas for inclusion of damaging statements in his personnel file when employer disregards personnel procedure which requires notification before a damaging statement can be placed in the personnel file.

Ebright v. Whitehall (1982), 8 Ohio App.3d 29. For an activity to be classified as "work" within the meaning of the fair labor standards act, the time consumed in performing the activity must involve: (1) a physical or mental exertion, whether burdensome or not; (2) the exertion is controlled or required by the employer; and (3) the exertion is pursued necessarily and primarily for the benefit of the employer and his business.

Ebright v. Whitehall (1982), 8 Ohio App.3d 29. When a special statute and a general statute cover the same general subject matter, the special statute covering the particular matter must be read as an exception to the general statute.

Carrisalez v. Erie County Dept. of Human Services (Mar. 6, 1992), Erie App. No. E-91-19, unreported, 1992 WL 43110. Dishonesty requires that one act with a wrongful intent to gain an unwarranted or unearned advantage; poor judgment does not equate with dishonesty. View Court of Appeals Decision | View SPBR Order

Bradley v. Ohio Dept. of Youth Services (July 12, 1991), PBR 90-REM-12-1117; aff'd (Sept. 29, 1992), Franklin Co., No. 91CVF-07-5927, unreported. A restraining hold used merely to gain control of a situation does not rise to the level of physical abuse. View Common Pleas Decision | View SPBR Order

Young v. Hocking Correctional Facility (Aug. 12, 1986), PBR 86-REM-02-0178. Criticism of an employer's personnel policies is not a matter of public concern and is not "protected speech" within the First Amendment. View SPBR Order

Bennett v. Southern Ohio Correctional Facility (Apr. 5, 1984), Scioto Co., No. CIV-83-329, unreported. A regulation or policy of the state which requires prison guards to submit to random strip searches as a condition of employment is constitutionally permissible and does not violate any reasonable expectation of privacy; any right to privacy is outweighed by the State's interest in preventing the introduction of contraband into prisons. View Common Pleas Decision | View SPBR Order