Hahn v. University of Cincinnati (1985), 22 Ohio Misc.2d 38. Illness, where it leads to the inefficient delivery of services or to an inability or unfitness to discharge one's duties, may be a basis for disciplinary action under R.C. 124.34, regardless of whether the charge specifically cited incompetency or inefficiency as the basis of the action.

Armitage v. Miami University (1995), 103 Ohio App.3d 461. A state agency may not appeal a decision of the state personnel board of review disaffirming an involuntary disability separation under R.C. 124.34 because an involuntary disability separation is not a removal or reduction in pay imposed for disciplinary reasons.

Thomas v. Coshocton County Sheriff (Nov. 18, 1994), Coshocton App. No. 94-CA-6, unreported, 1994 WL 668179; cert denied 71 Ohio St.3d 1503. An appointing authority's decision to place an employee on involuntary disability separation rather than to immediately terminate the employee was tacit acknowledgement of the mitigating circumstances surrounding the employee's conduct.

State, ex rel. Hennekes v. North College Hill Fire Dept. (Nov. 5, 1980), Hamilton App. No. C-790643, unreported. Mandamus is a proper remedy for a disability removal when the removal order does not comply with R.C. 124.34.

Collyer v. Ohio Dept. of MR/DD (Aug. 12, 1996), Franklin Co., No. 95CVF07-5023, unreported. Because the State Personnel Board of Review has jurisdiction over layoff appeals brought by classified employees from final decisions of appointing authorities, where Appellant was involuntary disability separated at the time the facility at which he worked was closed and the record does not indicate that the appointing authority made any order regarding Appellant's layoff from that facility, the Board has no jurisdiction to take any action regarding the layoff. View Common Pleas Decision | View SPBR Order

Hardy v. Ohio Dept. of Public Safety (June 19, 1996), Stark Co., No. 96-CV-923, unreported. Where Appellant's position is covered by a valid collective bargaining agreement and that agreement gives an exclusive remedy for disputes involving involuntary disability separations, the State Personnel Board of Review has no jurisdiction over Appellant's appeal of her involuntary disability separation; such appeal may not be brought under R.C. 124.34 because an involuntary disability separation is not a disciplinary action. View Common Pleas Decision | View SPBR Order

Armitage v. Miami University (Nov. 28, 1994), Butler Co., No. CV94-10-1729, unreported. R.C. 119.12 allows a state agency to appeal a decision of the state personnel board of review disaffirming an involuntary disability separation in Franklin County, but not in the employee's county of residence.

Lowe v. Zanesville-Muskingum County General Health District (Sept. 24, 1993), PBR 92-IDS-04-0214; aff'd (Nov. 4, 1993), Full Board; aff'd (Apr. 1994) Muskingum Co., No. CF93-853, unreported; withdrawn (Apr. 1994), Franklin Co., No. 93CVF11-8033. Failure to request reinstatement from an involuntary disability separation does not constitute a waiver of the right to reinstatement; an employee has the right to be reinstated to his or her position within three years from the effective date of his or her separation and the appointing authority must review and give credence to any evidence submitted by the employee. View SPBR Order

Currington v. Franklin County Sheriff (July 30, 1992), PBR No. 92-IDS-01-0041; aff'd (Aug. 21, 1992), Full Board; aff'd (July 1993), Franklin Co., No. 92CVF09-7012. If an appointing authority feels an employee cannot perform the substantial and material duties of his job, the appointing authority can contact a designated doctor to examine and determine if, indeed, the employee can or cannot perform the duties of his position; absent medical evidence presented to establish that an employee could not perform his job duties, termination of the employee by the appointing authority is a de facto removal and governed by the provisions of R.C. 124.34. View SPBR Order

Shegow v. Ohio State University (Mar. 30, 1992), PBR 91-REM-10-0667. Where university policy provides the option of placing an employee on disability separation for more than six months, an employee could, theoretically, be out on disability separation for more than a year and still be entitled to reinstatement without the necessity of retesting and rehiring; the employee's disability separation would not constitute a break in service and employee could still be within her probationary period. View SPBR Order

Deem v. Hamilton County Board of Commissioners (Dec. 14, 1990), Franklin Co., No. 90CVF-04-2991, unreported. An appointing authority may not base its order of involuntary disability separation on the same injury for which they deny a worker's compensation claim, as the two actions are irreconcilable; this allows the appointing authority to remove an employee for an injury they claim he does not have. View Common Pleas Decision

Summers v. Ohio Dept. of Health (May 28, 1992), PBR No. 92-IDS-02-0079; aff'd (July 16, 1992), Full Board. Where the appointing authority's order of disability separation is procedurally defective, resulting in the reinstatement of appellant to her most recent position, but appellant has failed to receive certification of her capability of returning to her job duties and has, indeed, been certified not to have been capable of return until a very recent date, appellant is not entitled to receive back pay for the period that she was disability separated. View SPBR Order

Fultz v. Chillicothe Correctional Institution (Oct. 23, 1986), PBR 86-REM-05-0577. An involuntary disability separation is the appropriate discipline where an employee cannot perform the duties of his position due to a medical condition; the burden is on the employee to show that his medical condition has been brought under control. View SPBR Order

Gilmore v. Rehabilitation Services Commission (Mar. 13, 1986), PBR No. 85-MIS-08-1191. In order to determine whether a disability separation is enforceable, the state personnel board of review must take evidence on more than procedure; if insufficient evidence is produced to substantiate the disability, the separation is a removal and may be disaffirmed under this Board's authority to reject improperly executed removals. View SPBR Order