State ex rel. Dean v. Huddle, 75-922
| Decision Date | 10 March 1976 |
| Docket Number | No. 75-922,75-922 |
| Citation | 344 N.E.2d 138,74 O.O.2d 378,45 Ohio St.2d 234 |
| Parties | , 74 O.O.2d 378 The STATE ex rel. DEAN, Appellant, v. HUDDLE, Dir., Appellee. |
| Court | Ohio Supreme Court |
On December 31, 1973, relator, Frederick M. Dean, was laid off from the Department of Development of the city of Columbus. Relator held the position of Development Project Assistant One in Urban Renewal.
Contending that his layoff was illegal, relator, on August 30, 1974, sought a writ of mandamus in the Court of Appeals to compel the Director of the Department of Development to reinstate him in his job and 'secure and return to him the compensation due him for the period of time during which relator was wrongfully excluded from him employment.' The complaint alleged that the compensation due relator 'can be established with certainty.' The parties, by stipulations of evidence and deposition, litigated both the issue of improper removal and the amount of back pay.
The Court of Appeals, although agreeing with appellant that 'the layoff was illegal' and that he should be returned to his employment, declined to award money damages to appellant. The court held that 'the amount of recovery applicable is not demonstrated to be established with certainty, based on the state of the record in this case,' and relegated relator to the 'bringing an action at law for money damages for the loss of wages proved occasioned because of his wrongful exclusion from employment * * *.' The court, in overruling relator's motion for reconsideration, upheld its position as to the state of the record.
The cause is now before this court pursuant to an appeal as of right from the judgment of the court as to the denial of money damages.
Clayman & Jaffy, Stewart R. Jaffy and John W. Kenesey, Columbus, for appellant.
Robert A. Bell and Dennis R. Morgan, Columbus, for appellee.
The issue to be determined is whether the Court of Appeals was correct in precluding relator from a recovery of money damages and relegating him to bringing a separate action at law for those damages.
In Monaghan v. Richley (1972), 32 Ohio St.2d 190, 291 N.E.2d 462 this court said in the syllabus that:
'An action in mandamus is maintainable by a reinstated public employee to recover compensation due him for the period of time during which he was wrongfully excluded from employment, provided the amount recoverable is established with certainty.' (Emphasis added.)
The court, in Monaghan, at page 195, 291 N.E.2d at 462 said that ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State ex rel. Bardo v. City of Lyndhurst
...its decisions in Monaghan v. Richley (1972), 32 Ohio St.2d 190, 61 O.O.2d 425, 291 N.E.2d 462, and State, ex rel. Dean, v. Huddle (1976), 45 Ohio St.2d 234, 74 O.O.2d 378, 344 N.E.2d 138. The respondents rely on State, ex rel. Gibbons, v. Cleveland (1984), 9 Ohio St.3d 216, 9 OBR 526, 459 N......
-
State ex rel. Butterbaugh v. Ross Cty. Bd. of Commrs.
...State ex rel. Crockett v. Robinson (1981), 67 Ohio St.2d 363, 21 O.O.3d 228, 423 N.E.2d 1099; State ex rel. Dean v. Huddle (1976), 45 Ohio St.2d 234, 74 O.O.2d 378, 344 N.E.2d 138. Relator claims that the Ohio Supreme Court in Hamlin, by affirming an award of interest to a reinstated county......
-
State ex rel. Crockett v. Robinson
...two recent cases, a reinstated municipal employee has received interest on a back pay award. This court, in State ex rel. Dean v. Huddle (1976), 45 Ohio St.2d 234, 344 N.E.2d 138, reversed a decision denying a reinstated municipal employee an award of back pay and then issued a writ of mand......
-
State ex rel. Bednar v. N. Canton
...law. Crockett, 67 Ohio St.2d at 367-368, 21 O.O.3d at 231-232, 423 N.E.2d at 1102-1103; State ex rel. Dean v. Huddle (1976), 45 Ohio St.2d 234, at 236, 74 O.O.2d 378, at 379, 344 N.E.2d 138, at 140. By standardizing the burden of proof in these cases, we do not suggest that mandamus may be ......