Communications Workers of America v. State Employment Relations Board

Ohio Supreme Court

Communications Workers of America v. State Employment Relations Board

528 N.E.2d 566, 38 Ohio St. 3d 602, 1988 Ohio LEXIS 301

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedSeptember 21, 1988

DocketNo. 87-864

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 528 N.E.2d 566 (Communications Workers of America v. State Employment Relations Board) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Communications Workers of America v. State Employment Relations Board, 528 N.E.2d 566, 38 Ohio St. 3d 602, 1988 Ohio LEXIS 301 (Ohio 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

Douglas, J.,

dissenting. I dissent to the majority’s dismissal of this appeal as having been improvidently allowed.

The instant case presents this court with an excellent opportunity to address a vital question of great public interest and to announce a state-wide rule. The specific question presented is whether the State Employment Relations Board’s dismissal of an unfair labor practice charge is a final order which may be appealed to the court of common pleas under R.C. 4117.13(D). This important question has never been addressed by this court. As a result of today’s decision dismissing the instant appeal, trial courts and courts of appeals must continue to struggle with the issue without any guidance from this court, a situation which will inevitably cause confusion and conflict. Moreover, the parties to this appeal, having expended much time, energy and expense in pursuing [603]*603their cause in this court, are denied the definitive answer which they have every right to believe is forthcoming.

I cannot concur in the majority’s decision to squander this opportunity to formulate an authoritative rule on the important question presented by this case. Accordingly, I dissent.

Sweeney, J., concurs in the foregoing dissenting opinion.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Douglas, J.,

dissenting. I dissent to the majority’s dismissal of this appeal as having been improvidently allowed.

The instant case presents this court with an excellent opportunity to address a vital question of great public interest and to announce a state-wide rule. The specific question presented is whether the State Employment Relations Board’s dismissal of an unfair labor practice charge is a final order which may be appealed to the court of common pleas under R.C. 4117.13(D). This important question has never been addressed by this court. As a result of today’s decision dismissing the instant appeal, trial courts and courts of appeals must continue to struggle with the issue without any guidance from this court, a situation which will inevitably cause confusion and conflict. Moreover, the parties to this appeal, having expended much time, energy and expense in pursuing [603]*603their cause in this court, are denied the definitive answer which they have every right to believe is forthcoming.

I cannot concur in the majority’s decision to squander this opportunity to formulate an authoritative rule on the important question presented by this case. Accordingly, I dissent.

Sweeney, J., concurs in the foregoing dissenting opinion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

528 N.E.2d 566, 38 Ohio St. 3d 602, 1988 Ohio LEXIS 301, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/communications-workers-of-america-v-state-employment-relations-board-ohio-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack