In Veal v. Upreach LLC (10/20/11), an employee claimed
that her employer terminated her in retaliation for her contacting the EEOC.
The court of appeals, however, did not believe that the employee had presented
any evidence in support of her claim that she had engaged in protected
Appellant did not specifically allege or present evidence
establishing that she was engaged in a protected activity.... Her complaint and
memorandum opposing summary judgment merely alleged that she was terminated
after Pitts [her direct supervisor] saw her reading a book on employee rights
and overheard her placing a call to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
during work hours. However, appellant offered nothing to substantiate these
claims, nor did she explain how her allegations amounted to conduct protected....
It is refreshing to read an opinion in which a court refused
to take a plaintiff merely at her word by requiring some corroboration before
sending the case to a jury. Having said that, however, this case-at least in
Ohio state courts-is very much the exception, not the rule.
Visit the Ohio Employer's Law Blog for more
Presented by Kohrman Jackson & Krantz,
with offices in Cleveland and Columbus. For more information, contact Jon Hyman, a
partner in our Labor
& Employment group, at (216) 736-7226 or email@example.com.