Legal Opinion
Baldwin v. City of Cincinnati, Unpublished Decision (12-30-2005)
Ohio Court of Appeals
Decided December 30, 2005No. Appeal No. C-050292UnpublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
DECISION
{¶ 1} In a case of first impression, we hold that if an employee, terminated because of R.C. 124.34, has received a meaningful pre-termination hearing, the lack of a later civil service commission hearing does not violate due process.
{¶ 2} Benjamin Baldwin was convicted on three counts of felony drug trafficking. Prior to his conviction, he was employed by the Cincinnati Metropolitan Sewer District ("MSD") in a classified position. After his conviction, MSD terminated his employment. MSD acted under R.C. 124.34, which states that a person convicted of a felony "immediately forfeits"…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Cleveland Board of Education v. LoudermillSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Bernardini v. Board of EducationOhio Supreme Court · 1979
- State ex rel. Rose v. Ohio Department of Rehabilitation & CorrectionOhio Supreme Court · 2001
- Shearer v. Cuyahoga County HospitalOhio Court of Appeals · 1986
- State ex rel. Rose v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr.Ohio Supreme Court · 2001
3Cited by1 opinion
- Gaither-Thompson v. Ohio Civil Rights CommissionOhio Court of Appeals · 2008