Consolo v. City of Cleveland
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtO’Connor, J.
{¶ 1} Appellees, including Santo Consolo, work as construction-equipment operators and master mechanics for appellant city of Cleveland. Thirty-eight of the 40 appellees are or were dues-paying members of appellant International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 18 (“Local 18”). On October 30, 2001, appellees filed a complaint in common pleas court seeking a declaratory judgment, a writ of mandamus, and a money judgment against appellants, asserting that appellants are illegally denying prevailing wages to appellees. Appellees contend that they are entitled to wages and benefits consistent…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- University Hospital v. State Employment Relations BoardOhio Supreme Court · 1992
- Franklin County Law Enforcement Ass'n v. Fraternal Order of Police, Capital City Lodge No. 9Ohio Supreme Court · 1991
- Kinsey v. Board of TrusteesOhio Supreme Court · 1990
- City of Cincinnati v. Ohio Council 8, American Federation of State, County & Municipal EmployeesOhio Supreme Court · 1991
- Ohio Council 8 v. City of CincinnatiOhio Supreme Court · 1994
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- State ex rel. Davis v. Public Employees Retirement BoardOhio Supreme Court · 2008
- State Ex Rel. City of Cleveland v. SutulaOhio Supreme Court · 2010
- State ex rel. Municipal Construction Equipment Operators' Labor Council v. City of ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 2007
- State ex rel. Municipal Construction Equipment Operators' Labor Council v. City of ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 2007
- Fairland Assn. of Classroom Teachers v. Fairland Local Bd. of Edn.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2017
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.