Whether DUI/OVI cases, unemployment appeals, or criminal cases, Smith's Law Offices' record shows a steady flow of successes for our clients.
Please keep in mind that the success of any legal matter depends on the unique circumstances of each case and we cannot guarantee particular results for future clients based on successes we have achieved in past legal matters.
Our client accepted a job offer only to find out that the employer planned to classify him as an Independent Contractor. Independent contractors are generally paid with an 1099 without taxes being withheld and they are not eligible for unemployment compensation. However, there are rules and tests to determine whether a person should be classified as an employee or independent contractor. In this case, we showed that the employer improperly classified our client and, as a result, he was eligible for unemployment compensation.
Our client was a manager who was terminated because she was accused of giving discipline to a staff member in front of other employees and because the employer believed she had not met her goals under a performance plan. The employer failed to present any witness regarding the discipline given to the other employee and our client credibly testified that she gave the discipline in an office with the door closed. With regard to the performance plan, the Employer agreed that our client's goals and expectations had been changed and she still had another month left to meet the revised goals. As a result, the Hearing Officer agreed that the employer lacked just cause to terminate.
Our client was charged with an OVI; however, after extensive negotiations the OVI charges were dismissed.
Our client was terminated, despite having no prior discipline, after an allegation that she failed to pass a test at work. Through preparation and presentation of her case, we presented credible evidence that she did pass the test. The Hearing Officer agreed and approved her unemployment compensation.
An employer terminated our client for making an error on her time sheet even though she had no prior discipline. The Hearing Officer agreed that the error was not intentional and the employer lacked just cause to terminate an employee for a single incident with no prior discipline.
The RTA reclassified and reduced the pay a union employee as a non-union employee while they participated in training during a transfer between union positions. After a labor arbitration hearing, the arbitrator agreed with Amalgamated Transit Union Local 268 that the RTA breached the collective bargaining agreement. The arbitrator also ordered the RTA to give the grievant back-pay for the pay she lost.
Our client was terminated for an allegation of falsifying her time card, but when she was terminated the employer failed to allow her to fully respond or to get her phone that she asserted had proof that the allegation was untrue. The employer then proceeded with the hearing offering conclusory assertions without any evidence to support its claim. As a result, the Hearing Officer agreed that the employer lacked sufficient just cause at the time of the termination, and the benefits were approved.
Our client was terminated for failing to meet sales goals after being placed on a performance improvement plan. We were able to show the hearing officer that the goals were aspirational and not requirements of the job, that the goals and the job had changed, that our client had received a positive performance review, and that another sales person who did not meet their "goals" was not disciplined. The Hearing Officer agreed that the termination was without just cause and that our client was eligible for unemployment compensation.
Although the State had a BAC test to use in their case, we reached a resolution resulting a dismissal of OVI charges, saving our client from a mandatory one-year license suspension, high fines and jail.
Our client was charged with an OVI even though his breath test was slightly under the legal limit. The police can do this if they believe they have sufficient evidence of impairment regardless of the breath test results. We were able to argue that the other evidence in this case was weak, and as a result an agreement was reached to dismiss the OVI, thus saving our client from any license suspension and from high fines and high points to his license.
Our client was charged with a high tier OVI after she blow over 0.17 during a traffic stop; however, we reached an agreement for her to have the OVI dismissed, leaving only a non-moving citation. As a result, she was saved from points to her license, the impact to her auto insurance and mandatory jail time.
The employer terminated our client even though she had not received any prior discipline or notice that her job was in jeopardy. The Hearing Officer agreed with us that the employer had not shown that our client purposely broke any rules or policies, that she was insubordinate in any way, or that she was subject to discharge for any reason. As a result, our appeal was granted and our client was approved for benefits.
Our client was charged with a refusal second OVI in ten years, which would have carried with it a mandatory twenty days in jail. We pushed forward with evidence that she was not actually the operator of the motor vehicle and reached an agreement for her to have the OVI dismissed, receiving only a non-moving citation instead.
Our client's wife notified the employer that her husband would not be able to work due to a medical reasons. The employer responded by terminating our client claiming he no-call/no-showed. The Hearing Officer agreed that the absence was beyond our client's control and the employer received adequate notice due to the circumstances. Our client's unemployment compensation claim was approved and he was granted back-pay.
Our client was charged with an OVI after allegedly rolling through a stop sign and marked lanes violations. We obtained an agreement for her to have the OVI dismissed with just a traffic citation instead. She was happy to have been saved from a non-expungable OVI on her record, high points to her license, and other implications of an OVI.
Our client was charged with an OVI after a pedestrian accident that resulted in no injuries, even though our client took a breath test that showed he was under the limit for alcohol. The State then claimed that he was impaired due to prescription medications. After raising arguments through pre-trials and motions regarding the State's need to show a nexus between the prescriptions and any impairment, we were able to get the OVI dismissed and the license suspension terminated.
Our client had several absences from work, exceeding the employer's attendance policy. However, the absences were due to a bona fide medication reasons. The Hearing Officer agreed that an employer lacks just cause to terminate for absences due to bona fide medical reasons, and as a result our client was approved for unemployment and granted back-payments.
Our client was charged with an over-the-limit OVI as well as other traffic citations. After raising evidentiary issues through a suppression motion and negotiating with the prosecutor, and agreement was reached to dismiss the OVI and traffic citations in exchange for a plea to a non-moving violation. Our client was protected from an OVI on his record, increased auto-insurance rates and other implications of an OVI.
In this case, the grievant applied for and passed testing for a promotion, but the RTA refused to promote him even though it had an open position. In fact, it later promoted someone else to the position. The arbitrator agreed that the RTA violated the collective bargaining agreement, ordered the RTA to place the grievant in the next available position, and to give him back-pay that he lost from not being promoted until he receives his promotion.
The employer terminated our client for violating their attendance policy; however, the Hearing Officer agreed that terminations are without just cause when the absences are due to a bona fide medical issue. As a result, we won the unemployment hearing.
The employer discovered two incidents of paperwork being altered or incorrect and it terminated our client as a result. We showed the hearing officer that our client had not engaged in the alleged misconduct and as a result her unemployment benefits were approved.
In this case, a union member with a good work record was terminated by the RTA for using a GPS device to find her way to passengers pick-up and drop-off locations. The RTA claimed this violated its cellphone policy, even though the GPS device was not a cellphone. The arbitrator agreed that the termination was excessive and returned the grievant to work with back-pay
After much discussion and negotiation, as well as a suppression motion, we are able to reach an agreement to reduce a second in twenty OVI, with an alleged refusal, to a reckless op. charge. We were additionally able to vacate the administrative license suspension saving our client from the reinstatement fee.
After extensive negotiations and taking steps to mitigate the charges, a resolution was reached where charges of an OVI, marked lanes and speeding were reduced to a non-moving violation, saving our client from jail, points to their driving record, a reinstatement fee to the BMV, and a one-year license suspension.
Our client was alleged to have violated the law by hitting a fence post and leaving the scene. After arguing that the correct statute provides twenty-four hours to report an accident involving property other than another motor vehicle and demonstrating that our client's driving record was otherwise clean, an agreement was reached to dismiss the hit and skip charges entirely.
The Hearing Officer agreed with us that our client had just cause to resign from his position when it was shown that he was hired for a full-time position but only allowed to work two days per week. Back payments to our client were approved.
The employer failed with pay unemployment taxes for our client by claiming they were an independent contractor. We showed during the hearing that there was not a contract for a certain piece of work at a fixed price, the claimant did not have the right to employ assistants, there was no obligation to supply necessary tools or supplies, claimant did not have the right to control the progress of the work, she was required to work set hours, she was paid on a regular weekly basis, and she was not reimbursed for expenses. As a result, the Hearing Officer agreed that our client was actually an employee and she had just cause to resign when the employer cut her pay in half.
During our client's interview, they were told that they would earn $12.00 an hour and work full-time; however, when they arrived for the orientation they were told that they would receive less than $9.00 an hour and work part-time. They found themselves denied unemployment when they resigned, but the Hearing Officer agreed with us that there was just cause to resign and their benefits were approved with a back-payment.
Our client was charged with a second lifetime OVI among other citations. After negotiations with the prosecutor and a motion for discovery sanctions, the court agreed to dismiss the OVI charge resulting in a plea to a non-moving violation with no jail, no drivers intervention program and no points to his drivers license.
After extensive negotiations with the prosecutor, it was agreed to dismiss OVI, possession and paraphernalia charges in exchange for a plea to a non-moving violation, saving our client from high fines, points to his license and jail time.
Our client was observed in a parked vehicle and cited with an OVI because the police officer believed sitting in a running vehicle was operating for the purposes of an OVI. After demonstrating that "operating" requires actual movement of the vehicle, and therefore being parked in a vehicle is not an OVI, all charges were dismissed entirely.
Discussions with the prosecutor resulted in a dismissal of the OVI, saving our client from a license suspension, points to his license, high fines and jail time.
The employee was terminated for allegedly falsifying call records; however, the hearing officer agreed that the employer's choice to skip all of its progressive discipline steps violated just cause and therefore unemployment benefits were approved.
Our client was stopped for allegedly failing to use a turn signal on a small residential street. The traffic stop escalated, ultimately resulting in his second lifetime OVI charge. After raising issues with respect to the stop through a suppression motion, an agreement was reached to dismiss the OVI with our client agreeing to a reckless op. charge instead, saving him from jail time, a long license suspension, six points to his driving record and a non-expungeable second OVI conviction.
After our client asked to switch a a different shift, the employer determined there were no openings on other shifts and terminated our client. While the employer maintained that our client quit, the hearing officer agreed that this was a termination and the employer lacked just cause. We were able to obtain a decision approving our client's unemployment claim with back-payments.
Our client was stopped by the police for failing to display a license plate, even though she had appropriately and legally displayed her temporary tags in her rear window. She was ultimately charged with a drug OVI, drug paraphernalia and failing to display her license plate. After negotiations with the prosecutor and discussions with the judge, an agreement was reached to dismiss the OVI, drug and license plate charges in exchange for a plea to a traffic citation - protecting our client from any license suspension, high fines and jail.
The employer called a meeting with our client, started to argue with him, and then terminated him without giving a reason. The employer then claimed it had several reasons to terminate including insubordination during the final meeting. We showed, however, that the employer lacked evidence to support any of its allegations. Further, an employer should be limited to the reason it gave at the time of the termination and, in this case, the employer did not provide any reason. Therefore, it lacked just cause to terminate.
Our client and co-worker placed a wager on an OSU football game and when our client asked the co-worker to pay what was still due from the wager, the co-worker rushed him and put him in a headlock until other employees removed him. The Hearing Officer agreed that the employer lacked just cause to terminate our client who was the victim in the altercation.
Our client accepted a temporary position from the U.S. Postal Service through the holidays. After the temporary position came to an end, he reapplied for unemployment but was denied. After a hearing, we obtained a decision approving his unemployment claim and back-pay.
While appearing for a trial, we made clear that for the second time the prosecution was unable to proceed with their case. As a result, the State dismissed all charges against our client.
While the employer argued that it had just cause to terminate our client during a Performance Improvement Plan, we showed that the employer had not given our employee till the end of the PIP to meet his goals and nothing else occurred during the PIP that justified termination.
Although our client was initially denied unemployment because ODJFS claimed she was ineligible due to (a) a disqualifying separation and (b) because she was going to school, we prevailed at her hearing. The Hearing Officer agreed that (a) the employer lacked just cause to terminate her and (b) the schooling did not disqualify her because she was attending school before she was terminated.
Our client was charged received two drug charges and an underage possession of alcohol charge. We negotiated a dismissal of all drug charges and a diversion program for the remaining misdemeanor charge. Once our client completes the diversion program, the misdemeanor charge will also be dismissed and sealed protecting , his clean criminal record while avoiding jail and high fines.
At a suppression hearing, it was agreed that the State could not make its case that the police had a lawful reason to initiate a traffic stop for an alleged marked lanes violation. As a result, the OVI charges and all traffic charges were dismissed and the Administrative License Suspension was vacated.
After our client was denied unemployment due to an allegation that she was not medically able to work, we researched her case and gathered medical documentation for the hearing officer. That hearing officer agreed that she was able to work and approved her claim for unemployment benefits.
Administrative License Suspensions ("ALS") should only be imposed when the police have probable cause to arrest an individual for an OVI or physical control and that person either refuses a chemical test or takes the test and scores over the legal limit. In our case, the individual took a urine test and the police, without yet receiving any results from the test, placed the person under an ALS. We were able to get the ALS thrown out (vacated) in an attempt to help our client get back to driving and avoid reinstatement fees.
The employer met with our client on two occasions, made allegations about his work performance and our client answered the allegations. When the employer did not seem to believe our client, he asked, "Are you calling me a liar?" The employer claimed this was insubordination and terminated him. The Hearing Officer agreed that this did not rise to the level of insubordination and did not warrant termination.
The Employer changed our client's job duties, cut their full-time job down to 16 hours per week, and would not confirm the new rate of pay. The Hearing Officer agreed that our client was involuntarily unemployed through no fault of her own and she was not required to accept the new position because the reduction in hours/pay made it not suitable.
During extensive negotiations with the prosecutor it was agreed that the State's case against my client was limited, and a result it was agreed that the OVI charges would be dismissed with our client pleading to a non-moving violation to avoid points to his license, high fines and the loss of his job.
The employer claimed our client did not call in for three absences and that she was not medically able to work. We showed that our client did call in for each absence and, although with some medical restrictions, was able to work. The Hearing Officer agreed.
After a telephone hearing, the Hearing Officer agreed with our client that they did not engage in misconduct to justify their termination.
After much discussions with the prosecutor, we reached an agreement and approval by the court to dismiss all OVI charges, leaving just a non-moving violation and saving our client from high fines, points on his license, jail time and a long license suspension.
Our client was charged with telephone harassment, a first-degree misdemeanor punishable by to 180 days in jail and $1,000 in fines, as well as menacing, a fourth-degree misdemeanor punishable by up to 30 days in jail and $250.00 in fines. After negotiations with the prosecutor, the charges were dismissed with our client agreeing to a minor-misdemeanor charge instead with no jail time and a fine of $75.00.
OVI charges were dismissed against our client and an Administrative License Suspension Vacated after negotiations led to a reduction to a reckless op charge. In addition to saving our client from six points to their license, high fines, jail time and a license reinstatement fee, they were able to get their full license back.
Our client was charged with a hit and skip after an accident. We were able to obtain a dismissal of the charge, saving our client from a high fine, first-degree misdemeanor, jail time, license suspension and six points to his license.
Our client worked full-time, was laid off, and then offered a position at about half the hours and split - with a couple hours in the morning and a couple hours in the afternoon. The Hearing Officer agreed that this was not an offer of suitable work that our client was required to accept, and thus his application for unemployment compensation was approved.
After prevailing at a labor arbitration, the employer appealed the decision to the Lucas County Court of Common Pleas. After litigating the issue, the court denied the employer's motion to vacate/modify the award and the decision in favor of our client remained in force.
Our client received multiple citations after a minor fender bender on Put-in-Bay. After extensive negotiations, motions regarding delays in discovery responses, and development of potential defenses an agreement was reached to dismiss all charges and amend the OVI to a reckless op charge.
Our client's commercial driver's license (CDL) was at risk after a citation for an OVI. After intensive negotiations, we were able to obtain a dismissal of the OVI as well as vacating the Administrative License Suspension (ALS), protecting our clients CDL.
After we prevailed in the Eighth District, vacating all convictions against our adolescent client, the County Prosecutor appealed to the Ohio Supreme Court. The Ohio Supreme Court declined to accept jurisdiction and thus our client's convictions remain vacated.
The Hearing Officer agreed that our client may have taken an act at work that demonstrated poor judgement, it was not an act that demonstrated a disregard of the employer's interests or of sufficient fault/misconduct to justify termination. The employer's delay of three months to terminate the employee after the act was also a factor leading to the hearing officer approving unemployment compensation.
The arbitrator agreed that the employer engaged in conduct that violated the CBA, split one classification into two, gave promotional exams that were not appropriate for the position being tested for, and passed over a union member that had successfully held the position for a number of years.
Our client and a co-worker were having an argument during which the co-worker was called a Peppa Pig. The Hearing officer agreed that there was not sufficient fault or misconduct to justify termination.
Our client took a job while unemployed that was physically demanding. When the job turned out to be too much for him, he attempted to move to another position at the employer but was unable. The Hearing Officer agreed that this was just cause to resign.
After raising issues with respect to the traffic stop, delays in discovery and with the urine test, the OVI was completely dismissed.
We showed that the employer failed to make its performance expectations known at time of hire and that the employee met the expectations.
A second shift lead told our client, who worked on third shift, to complete a task but the third shift lead gave different instructions. The Hearing Officer agreed that the employer lacked just cause to terminate for insubordination because our client was correct in following the directions of his immediate lead.
Employer who terminated our client for a perceived conflict from owning a side business lacked just cause because there was insufficient evidence of a real conflict of interest.
We persuaded the prosecutor and judge to agree to reduce OVI charges to a non-moving violation, saving our client from a year-long license suspension, points to his driver's license, high fines and jail.
After prepping our client for the telephone hearing and cross-examining the employer’s witnesses, the hearing officer concluded that our client was more credible and the employer’s claims that it gave prior warnings for performance issues was unsupported.
Our client was saved from the implications of an OVI on their record and avoided jail time and high fines.
Our client was saved from a lengthy license suspension, jail, a driver's intervention program and six points to his driving record.
An OVI and five other charges were dismissed in exchange for a plea to a minor misdemeanor with a maximum $150 fine, no jail time, no drivers intervention program, no probation and no license suspension.
The employer subjected our client to tests during orientation and then terminated her when she did not pass one. The Hearing Officer agreed that, because the employer did not inform her before she was hired that she would have to pass the tests, it did not have just cause to terminate her when she was unable to pass one.
When our client was placed indefinitely in a position that caused him pain due to a medical condition, and as a result he called off until he was placed in another position, the employer terminated him. The Hearing Officer agreed that the employer lacked just cause and approved our client for benefits.
With the OVI dismissed, our client was saved from a year's license suspension, points on her license, jail time, and high fines.
Our client had been denied benefits because he was not only a salaried employee, but also a member of an LLC filing as a C-Corp. The Hearing Officer agreed that, regardless of being a part owner, he was eligible for benefits.
Through negotiating with the prosecutor, an agreement was reached to dismiss an OVI charge against our client.
A company paid unemployment taxes to another state for an employee who lived in and worked primarily in Ohio. The Hearing Officer agreed that he was eligible for Ohio Unemployment Compensation.
After extensive discussions regarding the applicability of two prior out-of-state OVI charges, it was agreed to treat this OVI charge as a first in 10, saving our client from a mandatory thirty days in jail.
After a great deal of work, the State agreed to dismiss OVI charges despite being a second lifetime OVI.
The state agreed to dismiss several charges, including an OVI, in exchange for a plea to a non-moving violation that avoided a license suspension entirely, high fines and points.
At a labor arbitration hearing between the Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority and the Amalgamated Transit Union Local 268, the arbitrator agreed with us that the employer lacked just cause to skip progressive discipline steps to terminate an employee. The employee was awarded their job back with back-pay.
Our client had originally been charged with an OVI, but after showing the court that the vehicle had not been moved/operated, the state attempted to bring a physical control charge several months later. We filed to dismiss the charges as violating speedy trial rights and the court agreed.
Employer lacked just cause to terminate an employee for repeatedly raising his concerns that he was not paid a raise he was promised and for an unsubstantiated complaint.
In exchange for a plea to a non-moving violation and minor misdemeanor, saving our client from a license suspension, points to his driving record and mandatory jail time, we were able to get the following charges dismissed entirely: OVI, left of center, improper turn, weaving, seat belt violation and resisting arrest.
At a labor arbitration hearing between the Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority and the Amalgamated Transit Union Local 268, the arbitrator agreed that the employer lacked a good reason to pull the employee from work simply because they filed for and extension FMLA. The Arbitrator rejected the employer's argument that they needed to pull the employee because of their medical diagnosis when we showed they had worked under the same FMLA for over a year without issue.
The employer told our client that he did not "give a f*** about" her, that he had, "no use for her anymore," that her "career was on the line" and that she had until the end of the day to "prove her worth" to him at which point he hung up the phone- cut off her access to the company's database and her company cell phone was deactivated. The Hearing Officer agreed that this was effectively a termination and the employer lacked just cause.
Although our client attempted to call off but could not leave a message and sent an email to human resources reporting off, the employer terminated him for a no-call/no-show. The hearing officer agreed that this was not a no-call/no-show.
Employer failed to present sufficient evidence to support its claim that it had just cause to terminate an employee for failing to inspect a part.
The half-sister of our thirteen-year-old client tattled to her parents that our client said the word "suck." In the midst of discord between the parents, our client was ultimately charged with Rape and Kidnapping. The Appellate Court agreed with our arguments that the trial court erroneously permitted hearsay statements without any independent evidence to support those statements. It further agreed that, even with the hearsay, there was insufficient evidence to support the convictions. Our client's innocence was protected as the convictions were thrown out.
The Hearing Officer agreed that the employer lacked just cause to terminate our client for leaving his vehicle running while he was inside a postal facility gathering mail for his route.
The employer had a policy that required random testing during work hours. Our client was selected, scheduled to take a test within a half-hour of her shift ending, provided a sample that was insufficient, and had to leave due to prior commitments. In this case, the Hearing Officer agreed that the policy was not applied reasonably and therefore the employer lacked just cause to terminate.
The Hearing Officer agreed that our client who was attacked by a co-worker did not instigate the altercation and merely protected herself.
The Hearing Officer agreed that an employer who skipped steps in its progressive discipline policy did not have just cause to terminate our client.
Our client was pulled over for speeding but was charged with an OVI because she had spilt Taco Bell admitted to have two glasses of wine earlier in the day. The OVI was dismissed, accepting a non-moving violation saving her from a year license suspension, 6 points on her license and an OVI conviction that may have caused her problems with her nursing job.
Our client was pulled over for an expired license plate only to find himself charged for operative a vehicle while impaired because he admitted he had three drinks earlier in the day. We obtained a dismissal of the OVI with our client accepting a non-moving violation- saving himself from a license suspension.
The Hearing Officer agreed that an employee's absences due to his ailing wife or because of his own illness were circumstances beyond the employee's control and did not give the employer just cause to terminate.
The Hearing Officer concluded that the employer failed to provide sufficient evidence that it followed its progressive discipline policy and that the employee actually violated a policy.
After intensive negotiations, OVI charges were dismissed with our client pleading to just a non-moving violation instead.