Legal Opinion

State Ex Rel. Artman v. McDonough

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 2, 1936No. 26047PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMatthias, J.

The relator was a probationary appointee only. That fact is conceded. In our view that is the determinative fact in this case. It is provided by Section 486-13, General Code, as follows: “* * * All original and promotional appointments shall he for a probationary period of not to exceed three months to be fixed by the rules of the commission, and no appointment or promotion shall be deemed finally made until the appointee has satisfactorily served his probationary period. At the end of the probationary period the appointing officer shall transmit to the commission a record of the employe’s…

2Cited by10 opinions

  1. Walton v. Montgomery County Welfare DepartmentOhio Supreme Court · 1982
  2. City of Tacoma v. Civil Service BoardCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1972
  3. Miracle v. Ohio Dept. of Veterans Servs. (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2019
  4. State Ex Rel. Clements v. BabbOhio Supreme Court · 1948
  5. State ex rel. Krejci v. Civil Service CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1985

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API