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 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.
After researching our clients case,- reviewing police reports and video, filing a suppression motion and attending a suppression hearing, further negotiations with the prosecutor led to a dismissal of OVI charges in exchange for an agreement to a plea to reckless op., thereby eliminating the license suspension and mandatory penalties that would have come with an OVI conviction.
Intensive negotiations with the prosecutor resulted in our client's OVI being dismissed in exchange for a plea to a non-moving violation.
An administrative license suspension for a person with third OVI in ten years and who refused the breath test was vacated after showing that the ALS form was not properly filed with the court.
Court agreed to dismiss a refusal OVI in exchange for a plea to a non-moving violation.
At a labor arbitration hearing between the Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority and the Amalgamated Transit Union Local 268, the employer argued that it had just cause to discipline and terminate an employee due to an allegation that she made a threatening comment about her supervisor to a co-worker. However, the arbitrator agreed that the only evidence to support the employer's allegation was the report of the co-worker, who the employer failed to call as a witness to the hearing. Rather than rely on uncorroborated hearsay, the arbitrator awarded the employee their job back with backpay.
The Hearing Officer agreed that the employer failed to present sufficient evidence of misconduct in light of the employee's credible testimony denying misconduct.
The employer hired our client but failed to provide any training for how to do their job and failed to provide timely notice of their mistakes until they were terminated. The Hearing Officer agreed that they lacked just cause to terminate.
Charges were dismissed in exchange for plea to a reduced charge, saving our client from jail, higher fines and points.
Charges brought as a result of a marital argument and slap were dismissed, saving our client from the loss of her professional license.
OVI charges dismissed with an agreement to a non-moving violation, saving our client from high fines, points and a license suspension.
The Employee resigned with a two-day notice, the employer sent the employee home and did not pay them for the remaining two days. The Hearing Officer agreed that this should be looked at as a termination rather than a resignation, and there was not just cause to terminate.
Attending the hearing fully prepared- we persuaded the hearing officer that the employer's reliance on hearsay and unsubstantiated evidence of our client being insubordinate was insufficient, especially in light of our client's credible testimony.
The employer first cut our client's hours and then- despite our client's medical restrictions, attempted to force her into a position she was unable to work. The Hearing Officer agreed that the employer did not have just cause to terminate her for being unable to complete the work.
The court agreed to dismiss breath test OVI charges and vacate the administrative license suspension in exchange to a plea to a lesser charge, saving our client from a suspension, reinstatement fees, large fines, and any jail time.
An employer terminated our client- then offered her a job at half the pay. Although her benefits were initially denied- we were able to persuade the Hearing Officer that the work offered was not suitable and that she had good cause to turn it down.
The Hearing Officer agreed that the nurse had just cause to quit, because the employer's decision to require her to perform duties beyond her expertise put her license and the possible well-being of the patients at risk.
As a result of our suppression motion challenging a traffic stop in a gated community, the court agreed to dismiss OVI charges in exchange for a reduction to a non-moving violation.
Although the employer claimed it terminated our client for shouting at a supervisor, our client's testimony was more credible and the employer failed to show our client was at fault for any alleged argument about its own failure to provide sufficient parts.
The Hearing Officer agreed that the employer lacked just cause to terminate our client who had absences due to her own illness and that of her daughter and husband, and therefore approved her benefits.
Our client attempted to return to work after a medical leave of absence only to find that the employer had laid off much of its workforce and refused to return his calls. The Hearing Officer agreed that the employer lacked just cause to terminate and approved his benefits.
The Hearing Officer agreed that our client- who had no prior discipline, was terminated without just cause for an allegation of being rude to a co-worker. In part due to our preparation, the Hearing Officer concluded that our client's testimony was more credible than her employers.
Our client worked full time and held a real estate license. He was initially denied unemployment when he lost his full-time job because his real estate license with held with a broker. The Hearing Officer reversed, finding that just because a real estate broker held the license, this did not create an employment relationship.
After arguing suppression issues, the court agreed to reduce charges eliminating all mandatory jail time.
Prosecutor and court agreed with us to dismiss the OVI charges in exchange for a non-moving citation that protected our client from high fines, points to his license, and a year-long license suspension
OVI with an over-the-limit breath test dismissed in exchange for a non-moving violation thereby avoiding jail, license suspension, and points to our client's driving record.
The Hearing Officer did not agree with the employer that it had just cause to terminate for a no-call/no-show when the employee did call off to co-workers due to a bona fide medical illness.
The hearing officer was persuaded- in part due to statements from customers that they were happy with our client's performance, that the employer lacked just cause to terminate for failing to meet performance expectations.
When the employer promoted our client, it failed to explain the expectations of the new job and, therefore, lacked just cause to terminate the employee for failing to meet the unspoken expectations.
Employer alleged that our client made them feel intimidate, although it presented evidence of what our client did other that to move to a closer seat during a meeting. The employer lacked just cause to terminate.
Our client was off of work on a worker's compensation leave- having been examined by the employe's doctor and not given a release to return to work. The employer lacked just cause to terminate the employee for being absent without authorization.
The employer gave our client new duties to complete and then terminate our client for failing to complete those duties adequately. Because there had been a substantial change in the requirements for the position, the employer lacked just cause to terminate.
Our client was sent to observe another employee- found the employee dressed inappropriately- took a photo that she shared with her supervisor, and was then terminated for taking the photo. The Hearing Officer agreed that this was not just cause for termination.
Court agreed to dismiss OVI charges for a plea to a non-moving violation, vacating the ALS, eliminating the reinstatement fee-, jail time and license suspension.
Court agreed to dismiss an OVI based on levels of prescription meds in exchange for a reduced plea, vacating the ALS, eliminating the reinstatement fee, jail time and license suspension.
Client was facing mandatory jail time for both charges; however- the court agreed to dismiss the charges and vacate the ALS in exchange for a reduced plea that saved our client from all jail time, a $475 reinstatement fee and a license suspension.
The court agreed to dismiss charges and vacate the administrative license suspension to save our client from jail, from a reinstatement fee and a license suspension
Through negotiations with the prosecutor, it was agreed that all charges should be dismissed.
With the strength of a strong suppression motion and our being ready to go to hearing,- we were able to obtain a dismissal of second OVI charges in exchange for a non-moving violation.
We helped our client get their OVI and administrative license suspension dismissed,- saving our client's commercial driver's license and job.
Although facing a mandatory minimum of 20 days in jail, a dismissal and reduction saved our client from all jail time and avoided a year's license suspension.
Although our client was charged with a refusal OVI alleging marijuana impairment and possession- a dismissal of the charges in exchange for a reduction saved our client from a year's license suspension,- jail time and the driver's intervention program.
After obtaining a reduction to a non-moving violation, our client avoided a license suspension, avoided jail time, and avoided the drivers intervention program.