Powers & Duties of SPBR
2. Abuse of Discretion by Board
Kelly v. Whiting (1985), 17 Ohio St.3d 91. In an action brought pursuant to U.S.C. Title 42 Section 1983, a judge will not be deprived of immunity because the manner in which he acted was in error, was done maliciously, or was in excess of his authority; rather, he will be subject to liability only when he has acted in the clear absence of all jurisdiction.
State, ex rel. Ogan v. Teater (1978), 54 Ohio St.2d 235. An appointing authority may, in a mandamus action to enforce an order of the state personnel board of review disaffirming a layoff, assert the affirmative defense of an abuse of discretion by the board.
Henry's Cafe v. Board of Liquor Control (1959), 170 Ohio St. 233. The court of common pleas has no authority to modify a penalty that an administrative agency was authorized to and did impose, on the ground that the agency abused its discretion.
State, ex rel. Beck v. Hummel (1948), 150 Ohio St. 127. An official abuses his discretion or acts arbitrarily or oppressively where there is no substantial evidence to support his finding and determination.
Butler County Care Facility v. Chalfant (Dec. 20, 1995), Butler Co., No. CV95-05-0806, unreported. The state personnel board of review abuses its discretion when it sets aside the recommendation of the hearing examiner in direct disregard of that recommendation, and in the absence of any objection or any opportunity for the "losing" party to respond on the issue. View Common Pleas Decision | View SPBR Order