Osborn v. Ashland County Bd. of Alcohol, Drug Addiction and Mental Health Services, No. 91-4069

CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (6th Circuit)
Writing for the CourtPER CURIAM
Citation979 F.2d 1131
Docket NumberNo. 91-4069
Decision Date29 October 1992
PartiesRoger D. OSBORN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ASHLAND COUNTY BOARD OF ALCOHOL, DRUG ADDICTION AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES, et al., Defendants-Appellees.

Page 1131

979 F.2d 1131
Roger D. OSBORN, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
ASHLAND COUNTY BOARD OF ALCOHOL, DRUG ADDICTION AND MENTAL
HEALTH SERVICES, et al., Defendants-Appellees.
No. 91-4069.
United States Court of Appeals,
Sixth Circuit.
Argued Sept. 21, 1992.
Decided Oct. 29, 1992 *.

Mark A. Serrott, Columbus, Ohio (argued and briefed), for plaintiff-appellant.

David H. Meade (argued and briefed), Mark Landes, David G. Jennings, Isaac, Brant, Ledman & Becker, Columbus, Ohio, for defendant-appellee.

Before: JONES and SILER, Circuit Judges; and PECK, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM.

In this case, Roger D. Osborn, former executive director of an alcohol, drug addiction and mental health services board, claims that he was dismissed from his position on the board without due process of law. His due process arguments having been rejected by a state court, the federal district court entered summary judgment against Osborn on collateral estoppel grounds. We affirm the order of summary judgment on principles of res judicata. See Russ' Kwik Car Wash, Inc. v. Marathon Petroleum Co., 772 F.2d 214, 216 (6th Cir.1985) (per curiam) ("[a] decision below must be affirmed if correct for any reason, including a reason not considered by the lower court").

I. The Case

In 1973, Osborn became the executive director of the Ashland County Board of Mental Health. He was executive director in October 1989 when, pursuant to an Ohio statute, the board was expanded to encompass the areas of drug and alcohol addiction. The new Ashland County Board of Alcohol, Drug Addiction, and Mental

Page 1132

Health Services ("Board") conducted its first meeting on March 19, 1990.

At this meeting, Board member and defendant William Van Tilburg moved to remove Osborn "forthwith" for cause, citing Osborn's: (1) failure to cooperate with other organizations in need of services funded by the Board; (2) maintaining a conflict of interest as chief executive officer of a corporation contracting to provide services for the Board; and (3) lack of fiscal responsibility. Van Tilburg concluded by stating, "I'm going to resolve further that Mr. Osborn obviously be granted a hearing on this matter at a time and place to be established by the Board." The motion was seconded, and was carried by a vote of 10-5, with one abstention. Osborn retained counsel shortly thereafter.

The Board set a hearing date of March 26, 1990. Upon request by counsel for Osborn, and after an initial objection by a majority of the Board, the hearing was continued to April 23, 1990.

On April 26, 1990, after three evenings of hearings during which several witnesses were heard and documents were introduced, and over which an independent hearing officer presided, the Board voted 12-2 in favor of a motion to remove Osborn "effective 11:50, April 26, 1990."

Pursuant to Ohio Revised Code Annotated § 2506.01 (Baldwin 1987), Osborn brought an action in the Court of Common Pleas of Ashland County, Ohio, seeking to have the Board's termination decision overturned. He commenced his arguments in favor of reversal with the following:

I. THE BOARD'S MARCH 19, 1990 ACTION TERMINATING MR. OSBORN WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF A HEARING VIOLATED MR. OSBORN'S CONSTITUTIONAL DUE PROCESS RIGHTS.

II. THE POST-TERMINATION HEARING CONDUCTED BY THE BOARD VIOLATED MR. OSBORN'S CONSTITUTIONAL DUE PROCESS RIGHTS.

A. THE BOARD ERRED IN FAILING TO TIMELY PROVIDE A WRITTEN LIST OF THE CHARGES AND LIST OF WITNESSES.

1. THE BOARD ERRED IN REFUSING TO GRANT A CONTINUANCE AND BY ONLY GIVING MR. OSBORN TWO (2) BUSINESS DAYS TO RESPOND TO THE CHARGES AND PREPARE FOR THE HEARING.

B. MR. OSBORN WAS DENIED HIS DUE PROCESS RIGHT TO A FAIR HEARING BEFORE AN UNBIASED AND IMPARTIAL TRIBUNAL.

1. THE BOARD UNLAWFULLY PERFORMED INCONSISTENT FUNCTIONS BY ACTING AS ACCUSER, INVESTIGATOR, AND DECISION MAKER.

a. THE BOARD DID NOT ACT AS A FAIR AND IMPARTIAL TRIBUNAL AND WAS BIASED AGAINST MR. OSBORN.

2. THE BOARD ERRED IN CONDUCTING EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS WITH WITNESSES PRIOR TO THE HEARING.

C. THE BOARD ERRED IN CONSIDERING EVIDENCE OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF THE ORIGINAL CHARGES MADE ON MARCH 19, 1990.

On June 18, 1991, upon review of the transcript of the administrative hearing and briefs submitted by the parties, the state court concluded:

... This Court finds ... that the decision of the board is not unconstitutional; that it is not illegal; that it is not arbitrary; that it is not capricious; that it is not unreasonable; and that it is supported by the preponderance of substantial, reliable and probative evidence.

While this Court would have preferred more civility in the manner in which the hearing before the Board was conducted, a hearing was provided to Roger Osborn and he had an opportunity to be heard as to why his services were terminated by the Board.

For all of the reasons set forth hereinabove, and recognizing that the Board as fact finder, had the opportunity to observe

Page 1133

the demeanor of the witnesses and to weigh their credibility, this Court can only find that the decision of the Board was proper in all respects and that it was supported by the preponderance of substantial, reliable and probative evidence on the whole record and the Court, therefore, affirms the decision of the Board below.

Osborn appealed this decision to the Ashland County Court of Appeals in the Fifth Appellate District of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
102 practice notes
  • Epstein v. MCA, Inc., No. 92-55675
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit)
    • October 22, 1997
    ...375 U.S. 106, 84 S.Ct. 242, 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963); Osborn v. Ashland Cty. Page 1248 Bd. of Alcohol, Drug Addiction & Mental Health Svcs., 979 F.2d 1131 (6th Cir.1992). Some are like Torrisi--class actions in which the collateral attack was launched by class members who appeared and represen......
  • Estate of Owensby v. City of Cincinnati, No. 1:01 CV 00769.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 6th Circuit. United States District Courts. 6th Circuit. Southern District of Ohio
    • May 20, 2004
    ...Autoworkers Local 600, 8 F.3d 376, 378 (6th Cir.1993); Osborn v. Ashland County Bd. of Alcohol, Drug Addiction and Mental Health Servs., 979 F.2d 1131, 1133 (6th Cir.1992) (per curiam). In reviewing the instant motion, "this Court must determine whether the evidence presents a sufficient di......
  • Fallick v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., No. C2-95-1273.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 6th Circuit. United States District Courts. 6th Circuit. Southern District of Ohio
    • March 12, 1997
    ...Autoworkers Local 600, 8 F.3d 376, 378 (6th Cir.1993); Osborn v. Ashland County Bd. of Alcohol, Drug Addiction and Mental Health Servs., 979 F.2d 1131, 1133 (6th Cir.1992) (per curiam). The party that moves for summary judgment has the burden of showing that there are no genuine issues of m......
  • Brown v. Bd. of Educ. of the Shelby Cnty. Sch., No. 13–2586.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 6th Circuit. Western District of Tennessee
    • September 15, 2014
    ...Autoworkers Local 600, 8 F.3d 376, 378 (6th Cir.1993); Osborn v. Ashland Cnty. Bd. of Alcohol, Drug Addiction & Mental Health Servs., 979 F.2d 1131, 1133 (6th Cir.1992) (per curiam). The moving party has the burden of showing that there are no genuine issues of material fact at issue in the......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
102 cases
  • Epstein v. MCA, Inc., No. 92-55675
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit)
    • October 22, 1997
    ...375 U.S. 106, 84 S.Ct. 242, 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963); Osborn v. Ashland Cty. Page 1248 Bd. of Alcohol, Drug Addiction & Mental Health Svcs., 979 F.2d 1131 (6th Cir.1992). Some are like Torrisi--class actions in which the collateral attack was launched by class members who appeared and represen......
  • Estate of Owensby v. City of Cincinnati, No. 1:01 CV 00769.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 6th Circuit. United States District Courts. 6th Circuit. Southern District of Ohio
    • May 20, 2004
    ...Autoworkers Local 600, 8 F.3d 376, 378 (6th Cir.1993); Osborn v. Ashland County Bd. of Alcohol, Drug Addiction and Mental Health Servs., 979 F.2d 1131, 1133 (6th Cir.1992) (per curiam). In reviewing the instant motion, "this Court must determine whether the evidence presents a sufficient di......
  • Fallick v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., No. C2-95-1273.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 6th Circuit. United States District Courts. 6th Circuit. Southern District of Ohio
    • March 12, 1997
    ...Autoworkers Local 600, 8 F.3d 376, 378 (6th Cir.1993); Osborn v. Ashland County Bd. of Alcohol, Drug Addiction and Mental Health Servs., 979 F.2d 1131, 1133 (6th Cir.1992) (per curiam). The party that moves for summary judgment has the burden of showing that there are no genuine issues of m......
  • Brown v. Bd. of Educ. of the Shelby Cnty. Sch., No. 13–2586.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 6th Circuit. Western District of Tennessee
    • September 15, 2014
    ...Autoworkers Local 600, 8 F.3d 376, 378 (6th Cir.1993); Osborn v. Ashland Cnty. Bd. of Alcohol, Drug Addiction & Mental Health Servs., 979 F.2d 1131, 1133 (6th Cir.1992) (per curiam). The moving party has the burden of showing that there are no genuine issues of material fact at issue in the......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT