Legal Opinion

Allen v. totes/Isotoner Corp.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided August 27, 2009No. 2008-0845PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Per curiam

{¶ 1} This case arises from a grant of summary judgment in favor of totes/Isotoner Corporation, LaNisa Allen’s employer, on a discrimination complaint arising out of the Ohio Fair Employment Practices Act, R.C. Chapter 4112, as amended by the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, 138 Ohio Laws, Part I, 1430, 1431-1432. We originally accepted Allen’s discretionary appeal, which sought review of the issue whether Ohio law prohibits an employer from discriminating against a female employee because of or on the basis of lactation. For the reasons stated below, we find that summary judgment was properly…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. St. Mary's Honor Center v. HicksSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  2. Plumbers & Steamfitters Joint Apprenticeship Committee v. Ohio Civil Rights CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1981
  3. Hood v. Diamond Products, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1996
  4. Sidney Simpson v. Des Moines Water WorksCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2005

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Gaylor, Inc. v. GoodenowOhio Supreme Court · 2010
  2. LGR Realty, Inc. v. Frank & London Ins. AgencyOhio Supreme Court · 2018
  3. Miller v. Potash Corp. of Saskatchewan, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2010
  4. In Re RETAINING VORYS, SATER, SEYMOUR AND PEASE, L.L.P., AS SPECIAL COUNSELOhio Court of Appeals · 2011
  5. State v. TaverasOhio Court of Appeals · 2017

19 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