Legal Opinion
Harden v. General
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided February 11, 2004No. 2002-1663PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtO’Donnell, J.
{¶ 1} The matter for resolution on this appeal concerns whether R.C. 124.34 authorizes a public employer to discipline an employee by deducting vacation time that accrues subsequent to the disciplinary action.
{¶ 2} Larry D. Harden, a special agent supervisor of the Major Crimes Unit in the Ohio Attorney General’s Bureau of Criminal Identification and Investigation (“BCI”), received a notice from the Attorney General informing him that because of his failure to exercise supervisory responsibilities over an agent under his control, he would be disciplined in accordance with R.C. 124.34. That…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- State ex rel. Bassman v. EarhartOhio Supreme Court · 1985
3Cited by16 opinions
- Walker v. Shondrick-NauOhio Court of Appeals · 2014
- Eisenbarth v. ReusserOhio Court of Appeals · 2014
- State ex rel. Jordan v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2008
- Cosby v. Franklin Cty. Dept. of Job Family Servs., 07ap-41 (12-13-2007)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2007
- State ex rel. Walmart, Inc. v. HixsonOhio Court of Appeals · 2021
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.