Legal Opinion
State ex rel. Fenton v. Department of Human Services
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided April 8, 1992No. 90-1481PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Per curiam
Appellants argue that they are permanent employees of the city, in the classified service of the city, and entitled to civil service protection, despite the source of funding for their positions. Appellees maintain that CETA administrative employees are not in Columbus’ classified civil service. We find for appellants.
In State, ex rel. Cleveland, v. Columbus Dept, of Community Services (1986), 23 Ohio St.3d 47, 23 OBR 123, 491 N.E.2d 304, we held that CETA technical assistance and manpower placement officers, employed by the city of Columbus, were not in the classified service because…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Gooley v. ConwayCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1979
- State ex rel. Pennington v. RossOhio Supreme Court · 1980
- DeLarmi v. Borough of Fort LeeNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1975
- White v. City of PatersonNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1975
- State ex rel. Rose v. JamesOhio Supreme Court · 1991
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- State ex rel. Weiss v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1992
- State ex rel. Schneider v. Board of Education of North Olmsted City School DistrictOhio Supreme Court · 1992
- State Ex Rel. Fenton v. Department of Human ServicesOhio Court of Appeals · 1993
- State ex rel. Fenton v. Dept. of Human Serv.Ohio Supreme Court · 1992