Allen v. Ohio Department of Job & Family Services

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding that plaintiff did not establish an adverse employment action through performance evaluations when all he had was “unsupported speculation”
• finding that plaintiff did not establish an adverse employment action through performance evaluations when all he had was “unsupported speculation”
• finding that “because [the Plaintiff] [could not] demonstrate that anyone committed the insubordination he was charged with, he cannot establish a prima facie case of discrimination with respect to this disparate treatment claim”
• finding evidence of retaliatory harassment when a supervisor, among other things, “began communicating with [the plaintiff] only by email” and “generally treated [the plaintiff] with hostility”
• “[Because the plaintiff could not] demonstrate that anyone committed the insubordination that he was charged with, he cannot establish a prima facie case of discrimination.”
• “The Sixth Circuit has repeatedly and consistently held that the State of Ohio has not consented to be sued for state law claims in federal court. Rather, Ohio has consented to be sued in only one forum—the Ohio Court of Claims.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).