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 found his unemployment benefits challenged by his employer at each appeal step. Once a hearing was reached, we researched his file thoroughly and showed the Hearing Officer that the employer's appeal was filed late. The Hearing Officer agreed, rejected the appeal, and as a result our client was approved for his benefits.
The police initiated a traffic stop of our client because they claimed her license plate light was out at about 3:30am. The traffic stop quickly escalated to OVI and marijuana possession charges. When urine test results came in, an additional charge was brought for being over the legal limit of THC metabolites. After a thorough investigation of the case, we raised issues that resulted a dismissal of the OVI charges. Our client pled instead to a non-moving violation. As a result, she received no points to her driver's license, no license suspension and no jail. She also protected her good record.
After a head-on accident, our client was transported to the hospital. A state trooper initiated an investigation at the hospital and ultimately charged our client with an OVI and performed a urine test that came back with positive results. After a thorough investigation and filing multiple motions, we achieved a dismissal of the OVI charges with our client pleading to a non-moving citation. As a result, she avoided points to her license, a year-long license suspension and did not have to serve any time in jail or at a driver's intervention program.
Our client found himself subjected to field sobriety tests after the police arrived at his vehicle due to a report of a suspicious vehicle. We raised issues regarding the initial involvement of the police, signs of impairment and the conditions under which the field sobriety tests were conducted. By doing so, we achieved a dismissal of the OVI charges with our client pleading to a non-moving citation instead. This saved him from any jail, from the driver's intervention program, from points to his license and a year-long license suspension.
The police initiated a traffic stop of our client due to tinted windows, though the stop escalated into an OVI citation. Our investigation revealed that symptoms of anxiety during the stop were misinterpreted as signs of impairment. Leveraging this evidence, we obtained a complete dismissal of the OVI charges with our client merely pleading to the tinted windows citation with a fine of $10.00.
Despite our client providing an over-the-limit breath test, we investigated her charges and allegations to uncover several issues with the traffic stop. As a result, we were able to obtain a dismissal of the OVI charges with her pleading to a traffic offense instead. This saved her from high points on her license, an OVI on her record, and she walked out of court with her license and no suspension.
Our client was charged with an assault after an altercation with a girlfriend in his home. Despite the prosecution initially demanding a plea and a month in jail, we uncovered substantial credibility issues with the "victim." As a result, all charges against our client were completely dismissed.
Our client's husband was diagnosed with a life threatening medical condition. On her last day of employment, he required an emergency trip to the hospital. However, our client then found herself terminated and her employer fighting her unemployment benefits. Through a hearing, we showed that her absences were due to circumstances beyond her control, that she was not at fault and that she was eligible for benefits. The Hearing Officer agreed and approved her benefits.
After an alleged altercation at work, the employer terminated our client and he was denied unemployment compensation. Through a hearing, we showed the hearing officer that the allegations of an altercation were overblown and lacked credibility. The Hearing Officer agreed that the employer lacked reliable, probative and substantial evidence to corroborate their allegations. As a result, our client won his hearing and his benefits.
Our client was charged with a second life-time OVI with an over-the-limit breath test of 0.162. His priority to was to save his commercial driver's license which was subject to an automatic disqualification after an OVI. To accomplish this, we achieved an order vacating his administrative license suspension due to issues we raised with the ALS form. We then entered into extensive negotiations with the prosecutor involving the arresting officer and judge to reach an agreement pleading down the OVI and avoiding any license suspension. As a result, we not only saved our client from an OVI conviction but we also protected his CDL and his livelihood.
After being stopped for allegedly driving without headlights on, our client found herself subjected to SFSTs and giving a breath test that the police claimed was over twice the legal limit. However, through thorough preparation and extensive investigations, we obtained a dismissal of the OVI charges with our client accepting a non-moving citation instead. This saved her from points to her license and from a year-long license suspension, not to mention the problems an OVI would cause for her employment.
So many people are receive denials of their unemployment and fraud determinations because Unemployment is requiring a variety of identity documents. Typically, one needs to provide a copy of a photo ID, a second photo ID or a picture of them holding the first photo ID, a birth certificate, social security card, bank statement or voided check from the bank where their benefits are paid, and if they have married and changed their last name then their marriage certificate too. The social security card should be signed and the bank statement should show the person's name and account numbers. Unfortunately, when Unemployment rejects the documents, they often do not explain why. Because we know what they are looking for, we are frequently able to clear up these issues as we did in a case for which we receive another win for our client today.
Our client was involved in a physical altercation with another individual after she found herself charged with first-degree misdemeanor Assault with potential penalties including a $1,000 fine, six-months of jail and the obvious negative implications of having such a conviction on her record. Through investigating the allegations and extensive negotiations with the prosecutor, we obtained a dismissal of the assault charges. Our client pled to disorderly conduct instead, saving herself from any jail, high fines and the impact to her record.
Our client received a warning and then a termination due to absences. We showed that most if not all of the absences were due to personal illness or injury. As a result, the Hearing Officer agreed that she was not at fault for the absences and her benefits were approved.
Our client had a medical appointment during which she received received injections to her neck and an excuse to be off the rest of the day. She immediately reported this to her employer only to find out that she was terminated for "shirking her job responsibilities." Through a hearing, we showed the Hearing Officer that she was not at fault for being absent due to a bona fide medical issue. Further, she properly called off from her shift when she was given the doctor's note. As a result, she won her hearing and her benefits were approved.
More than a year after our client received PUA benefits, he received a denial and fraud allegation. ODFJS demanded all of his payments be repaid. Through an appeal, we obtained a win eliminating the overpayment balance.
Our client obtained a job while receiving unemployment. After only 2 1/2 days at the new job, he was terminated and then denied unemployment. The employer claimed that he failed to meet performance expectations. Through a hearing, we showed the hearing officer that he performed the tasks that were asked of him, that the expectations were not made clear at time of hire, and that it was not reasonable to expect him to meet all performance expectations after only 2 1/2 days. As a result, his benefits were approved.
Out client worked as a truck driver with a commercial driver's license. He experienced a medical issue after which his employer pulled him from working and placed him on unpaid FMLA. Our client was able to work, but just not able to work that job. He applied for unemployment and received a denial for being on a leave from his employer. We prevailed at a hearing, showing that (a) an employee can receive benefits during an involuntary leave and (b) he was otherwise able to work. As a result, he received his unemployment benefits.
Despite our client being allegedly observed drinking a beer while driving, we fought the OVI charges that were brought against him and obtained a dismissal of the charges with our client pleading to a traffic citation instead. This protected our client from a license suspension, jail time and the driver's intervention program.
After being charged with an OVI, our client sought our services for an aggressive defense. Through extensive investigation, we raised evidentiary issues regarding the case and obtained an agreement to dismiss the OVI charges with our client pleading to a traffic citation instead. This saved her from a license suspension, a driver's intervention program and jail, probation, high points to her driving record and an OVI on her record. Instead, she simply paid a small fine.
Our client was employed pursuant to a one-year employment contract. The employer informed our client that they would not renew the contract and our client provided a resignation notice with the resignation being the last day of the contract. The employer argued that he should not qualify for benefits; however, the Hearing Officer agreed that neither the fact that the contract was temporary nor that a resignation notice was tendered for the last day of the contract eliminated eligibility. As a result, we won the hearing.
Our client accepted a job offer and then, after only a week of work, was let go. The employer claimed his computer skills were not where they needed to be. ODJFS denied benefits, claiming our client resigned without just cause. Through a hearing we showed that he was terminated and that the termination was without just cause because there was inadequate training and no warnings regarding his job performance.
Our client was terminated for failing to meet performance expectations. Through a hearing, we showed that the sixty-days the employer allowed our client to meet expectations was unreasonable given the lack of guidance, training and follow-up provided to our client. As a result, we won the hearing and his benefits.
Like many people, our client received a denial of his unemployment benefits with a claim that he had committed fraud. We investigated his case and discovered that this was related to identity documentation. ODJFS requires (a) a photo id; (b) a second photo id or a selfie of the person holding the first photo id; (c) birth certificate; (d) social security card; (e) a copy of a voided check or bank statement from the bank to which benefits were sent; and (f) if the person no longer has their maiden name - a copy of their marriage certificate. We helped our client to gather and submit this documentation, prepared him for the hearing, and helped him make his case to the hearing officer. As a result he won his hearing and his benefits.
Our client was experiencing health concerns that ultimately led to her requesting FMLA. When she returned from FMLA, she was forced to sign a resignation or be terminated. The employer claimed that there were performance issues prior to her FMLA. We showed the hearing officer that these issues were due to her health concerns, which were beyond her control. As a result, we won the hearing and she was approved for benefits.
Although an employer alleged several issues of misconduct by our client; by researching the case thoroughly and preparing our client for the hearing, we presented credible testimony and evidence to dispute those allegations. As a result, we won the hearing and our client received her unemployment benefits.
Our client was terminated for allegedly sharing personally identifiable information of a client of her employer. As a result, ODJFS denied her unemployment compensation. Through a hearing, we showed that the information they alleged she shared was not protected information. As a result, the Hearing Officer ruled in our favor approving benefits for a termination without just cause.
Our client was involved in a minor traffic accident. When he stopped an argument ensued and he left the scene for his safety. As a result, he was charged with a traffic citation and a hit-and-skip charge. This charge carried with it a mandatory license suspension, a fine of up to $1,000 and up to six months of jail. After our investigation, we were able to obtain a dismissal of the OVI charge with our client pleading to a traffic citation with a fine of $50.00.
Our client had a medical condition that affected her ability to meet certain quotas at her employer. She notified her employer of this concern and requested accommodations. The employer failed to provide the needed accommodations and then terminated her for failing to meet the quotas. Through a hearing, we showed that the termination was the result of a medical condition rather than through any fault of her. The decision came back in her favor and she was approved for benefits.
An employer accused our client of violating a rule. During that meeting, our client became upset and said, "Why don't you just fire me." The employer then fired her for making that comment. The Hearing Officer agreed that such a comment did not justify a termination. The Hearing Officer ruled in our favor and approved our client for benefits.
An employer terminated our client for a customer complaint and claimed it had just cause to do so because she had received a prior disciplinary warning. Through a hearing, we showed that the employer lacked evidence to support the allegations of the complaint and that it skipped steps of its progressive discipline police. The Hearing Officer agreed, awarding our client her unemployment compensation.
After finding himself arrested and subjected to a breath test that read over the legal limit, our client hired us to defend him. We thoroughly investigated his case and found numerous issued including problems with the manner in which the field sobriety tests were conducted. As a result, the OVI charges were dismissed with our client pleading to a traffic citation instead. This saved him from a license suspension, high points on his license, reinstatement fees, and an OVI permanently on his record.
Our client was charged with an OVI after a traffic stop. We were able to raise several issues in his case, including the fact that instructions for the field sobriety tests were given in English even though our client's understanding of English was limited. The OVI charges were ultimately dismissed and a plea to a traffic station instead saving him from high points to his license, an OVI on his record and a license suspension.
Our client found her unemployment benefits denied because her employer did not properly report her wages to ODJFS. Through a hearing, we showed she met and exceeded the weekly earnings requirement to receive unemployment compensation. As a result, we prevailed at the hearing and her benefits were approved.
After being terminated from her job and denied unemployment compensation, our client called us for help. Through appealing the denial and representing her through a telephone hearing, we showed that (a) she had no prior discipline warnings and (b) the alleged misconduct did not warrant termination. In fact, she had acted just as she was trained to act. As a result, she prevailed at her hearing.
Our client worked for a temp agency where she was assigned to work that she could not physically perform due to medical conditions. She was asked to be reassigned, the temp agency agreed, but it did not offer her any future work. ODJFS denied her benefits, reasoning that she quit without just cause. We prevailed at a hearing by showing her employment came to an end due to a lack of work because the temp agency did not have any other assignments for her.
ODJFS claimed our client committed fraud in not correctly reporting earnings while receiving benefits. We prevailed at a hearing, convincing a hearing officer that she did in fact correctly report wages. As a result, overpayments and fraud penalties were eliminated.
Months after receiving benefits, our client found ODJFS denying his benefits and demanding repayment because they claimed he did not provide sufficient identity verification. We showed the hearing officer that he had provided the identity documentation and as a result the overpayment was eliminated.
ODJFS claimed our client was overpaid benefits because he did not provide sufficient employment verification. We prevailed at a hearing, overturning ODJFS's decision, and eliminating the overpayment they demanded.
After finding herself terminated from her employment and denied unemployment benefits, our client sought our representation. We prevailed at a hearing by showing that the employer lacked evidence of any misconduct and that, even if it did have evidence, it failed to follow its own progressive discipline steps. As a result, we prevailed at the hearing and our client received her benefits.
OVI charges were dismissed after we successfully raised issues regarding discrepancies between the police reports and video with the court.
Our client found herself terminated after receiving an evaluation that said she did not complete work timely and did not prioritize work well. However; through a telephone hearing, we showed that the employer lacked any evidence or examples of this alleged poor performance. As a result, the Hearing Officer agreed that the termination was without just cause and her benefits were approved.
Our client found his benefits denied after his employer terminated him due to customer complaints. Through a hearing, we showed that the employer lacked sufficient evidence of misconduct. As a result, we won the hearing and our client received his benefits.
To qualify for unemployment, one must have sufficient weeks of employment and earnings during their base period. Sometimes employers fail to properly report income, which then leads to ODJFS denying benefits. This happened to our client; however, through a hearing we showed that she had more than enough weeks of employment and income to qualify. As a result, she won her hearing.
After raising several issues regarding alleged indications of impairment as well as issues with field sobriety tests, we obtain a dismissal of OVI charges for our client with her accepting a plea to a non-moving traffic citation instead.
Our client, pursuant to her employment contract, provided a sixty-day resignation notice. The employer told her not to come back to work and did not pay her for the sixty days. By the time we reached an unemployment hearing, it attempted to fabricate alternative reasons for the resignation. However, we showed the hearing officer that the termination was a result of the resignation. The hearing officer agreed with us that, "If the employee is discharged during a notice of resignation period, and the employer does NOT pay normal wages to the employee for the balance of that period, then the question will be whether there was just cause in connection with work to support the discharge." The Hearing Officer also agreed that there was no just cause for the termination and, as a result, our client's benefits were approved.
When a person is arrested for an OVI and either refuses to take a chemical test or takes a test and the result is over-the-limit, they are immediately placed under an administrative license suspension. For a CDL driver, such as our client, this triggers a one-year disqualification of the CDL for a first, and lifetime disqualification for a second. While representing our client for an OVI charge, we appealed his administrative license suspension and prevailed, getting his suspension vacated. As a result, his CDL was also protected.
Our client found himself charged with an OVI after he was stopped for "weaving." However, we showed that he did not cross any marked lanes and as a result there were significant issues with the traffic stop. As a result, the OVI charges were dismissed, with our client pleading to a non-moving citation instead. He saved himself from high points, a year long license suspension and a mandatory driver's intervention program.
After being stopped for allegedly driving too slow, our client found herself charged with an OVI. We obtained a dismissal of the OVI charges by showing that driving slow is not an offense unless other traffic is impeded. She agreed to plead to a non-moving citation instead, saving herself from a year-long license suspension and high points to her license.
Our client was hired under a six month contract that was not renewed. The employer challenged his unemployment benefits, claiming that his contract simply came to an end. We showed the hearing officer that this is a qualifying reason for benefits and as a result won the hearing for our client.
Although our client was terminated during her probationary period, the employer was still required to show just cause to terminate to deny her benefits. We showed the hearing officer that the employer lacked just cause, lacked evidence of misconduct, and lacked evidence of prior warnings. As a result, our client won her hearing and her benefits.
Our client was approved for and paid PUA benefits, only to find months later that the PUA system denied her claim and demanded her benefits repaid because it believed she did not have a connection with the Ohio workforce. Through a hearing, we showed that while she did have connections with more than one state, her primary state was Ohio. As a result, she won her hearing and the overpayment was eliminated.
After being denied benefits years after receiving them because the PUA system claimed our client did not provide sufficient proof of employment, we obtained a decision in her favor through a telephone hearing.
Our client found the PUA system demanding repayment of his benefits because it claimed that he was not unemployed due to a pandemic related reason. We prevailed at a hearing, securing his benefits.
After our client was charged with an OVI after allegedly refusing a breath test, we quickly got his case set for a pre-trial and achieved a dismissal of the OVI charges with an agreement to a plea to traffic offence instead. This resulting in an immediate return of his license.
Our client found her employer appealing her unemployment benefits after terminating her. We showed that, not only did the employer fail to follow their progressive discipline policy, but it actually terminated her for refusing to sign discipline paperwork. The hearing officer agreed that this was not just cause. As a result, our client won her hearing.
PUA denied benefits to our client, claiming he did not provide sufficient employment verification. Through a hearing, we obtained a decision in his favor eliminating the overpayment claimed by the PUA.
Although our client was charged with an OVI after a traffic stop and providing a breath test that was over the limit, we reached an agreed to dismiss the OVI charges with our client pleading to traffic citations instead. Among other things, this saved her from a year-long license suspension.
Although our client was charged with an OVI after the police claimed he provided an over-the-limit breath test, we obtained a dismissal of his OVI charges with him pleading to a traffic citation instead. This saved him from a year-long license suspension and potentially saved his job and protected his military career.
ODJFS seems to have been sending out many fraud notices. Our client received such a notice; however, through a hearing we eliminated the fraud finding and ODJFS"s claims for overpayments.
Our client was charged with assault and unlawful restraint. By thorough investigation and extensive negotiations, a complete dismissal of the charges was obtained.
Our client was charged with an OVI. When we investigated the case, we found a lack of evidence to support the charges, in part because the field sobriety tests the state was relying upon were conducted in a snow storm and were therefore unreliable. Ultimately, an agreement was reached to dismiss the OVI charges with our client pleading instead to a non-moving traffic citation.
ATU Local 268 brought a labor arbitration forward after a member was disciplined for being involved with an auto accident, which it believed was through the fault of the other driver. We prevailed at the hearing, showing that the RTA violated the grievant's procedural due process rights. Teh arbitrator ordered that the discipline be removed from the grievant's "personnel file and from any other file, computer file, or other location in which it may reside."
Our client found her unemployment claim denied with accusations of fraud. Through investigating the matter and submitting evidence to the hearing officer, we prevailed at eliminating the fraud allegation and all claims that she had been overpaid.
Our client found themselves facing demands from ODJFS to pay back their benefits along with penalties for alleged fraud. We prevailed at the hearing, showing our client was entitled to the benefits.
Although our client was facing mandatory license suspensions for both OVI charges and Hit/Skip charges, we obtained a dismissal of both charges with our client accepting a non-moving citation instead with neither any points to her license or any license suspension.
Although our client had a prior OVI conviction and prior OVI reduction, thereby facing enhanced penalties, we investigated his new OVI charge thoroughly, raised evidentiary issues, and engaged in intensive negotiations with the prosecution to reach an agreement to dismiss the OVI charges with our client pleading to a traffic citation instead.
Our client worked as printer 40 years before becoming unemployment. While collecting unemployment, he explored a job opportunity at a restaurant; however, he turned down the job offer because it was outside of his career path and the compensation was significantly less than he previously received. Unemployment denied his benefits at that point for turning down the offer. We prevailed at a hearing, demonstrating that he had good cause to turn down the offer.
Our client worked for her employer for nearing 8 years without discipline. She was then placed on a performance improvement plan. She was told she was improving, but was then terminated. We showed the hearing officer that the employer lacked any specifics or evidence of performance issues after being put on the performance improvement plan. As a result, the Hearing Officer agreed and held that the termination was without just cause.
Our client was terminated for failing to meet performance expectations. To establish just cause in such circumstances, an employer must show: (1) the employee does not perform the required work; (2) the employer made known its expectations of the employee at the time of hiring; (3) the expectations were reasonable, and; (4) the requirements of the job did not change since the date of the original hiring for that particular position. During a hearing, we showed that the expectations were not reasonable and had changed during her employment. As a result, we prevailed at the hearing and her benefits were approved.
Although our client was charged with an OVI after providing a breath test that was about twice the legal limit, we were quickly able to obtain a dismissal of the OVI charges with our client simply pleading to a traffic citation instead. This saved our client from a year-long license suspension, high points on his license, and the impact of an OVI to his auto insurance and future employment opportunities.
When our client was hired, she was told that if she had a misdemeanor conviction within the past seven years, she would not be hired. On her hire material, she was asked whether she did have such a conviction. She answered No because, although she did have a conviction, it was well beyond the seven years. She was terminated for falsification. The Hearing Officer agreed, however, that because it was beyond the lookback period it was not falsification. As a result, the employer did not have just cause to terminate and benefits were approved.
Our client worked as a Human Resource Director until her employer let her go from that position and offered her a dietary aid position instead. She turned town that position because it was significantly different from the position she was hired for and because she did not believe she could meet the physical demands of the job. She found her benefits denied; however, until we prevailed at a hearing. The hearing officer agreed that she had just cause to turn down the offer of work because it was in a position that differed significantly from the position she was hired for.
After our client was charged with a second-in-ten OVI, we started to investigate the case. It was soon discovered that the police did not have or provide video referenced in the police report. As a result, an agreement was reached to dismiss the OVI charges.
Our client had a medical condition, of which the employer was aware, that limited her ability to perform certain physical duties. This was not a problem for the job she was hired into, but the employer insisted on changing her work duties and requiring her to perform physical work. As a result, she had no choice but to resign. While she was originally denied benefits, we were obtain a win for her at the telephone hearing.
With thorough preparation and research, we obtained a dismissal of OVI charges against our client with him pleading to a non-moving citation instead.
The Cleveland RTA attempted to impose what they referred to as a zero-tolerance cellphone policy without negotiating with the Union. They then attempted to terminate an employee who had an impeccable work record because he had a cellphone in his pocket while moving a train. The arbitrator agreed with us that the just cause provisions of the CBA superseded the unilaterally implemented policy and that, after a review of the facts, the termination violated just cause. As a result, the employee was awarded his job back with full back-pay.
Our client received a warning that stated that if he had another occurrence he would receive a final warning. Then the employer terminated him without the final warning. The hearing officer agreed with us that this skip in progressive discipline steps violated just cause and our client was approved for benefits.
When a person is receiving unemployment and has a week of earnings followed by a week of no earnings, they must restart their claim else they will find their benefits after that date denied. That is what happened to our client. However, through a hearing we showed why she had earnings the one week and not the following week and, as a result, the hearing officer granted her appeal.
Like many, our client found herself accused of fraud by ODJFS, with the agency demanding all of per benefits be repaid with penalties. We investigated the matter and worked with ODJFS, supplying needed documentation to disprove the fraud allegation. As a result, our client's appeal was granted and the overpayment removed.
Like many people who received Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA); our client found his benefits denied with a fraud determination. The PUA wanted all of his benefits back along with penalties. We investigated, collected documentation and appealed for him. As a result, the determinations were reversed and nullified. In the end, the fraud determination was eliminated and he did not owe any overpayment.
Our client worked as a school employee, contracted to provider dance lessons. At the end of her contract and employment, she filed for benefits. The school objected, claiming she had a reasonable assurance of employment in fall and was therefore not eligible for benefits. We showed the hearing officer that this was not the case and, as a result, obtained a win for our client.
Our client worked at a bank where, due to an issue with the vault, she was forced with no notice to stay after work until security arrived. After two-and-a-half hours with no one from security arriving, she allegedly made a gesture to a security camera facing her. She then found herself terminated. The hearing officer agreed that, even if inappropriate, the gesture in those circumstances did not warrant discharge without any prior warnings. As a result, her unemployment benefits were approved.
To qualify for weekly unemployment benefits, a person must be available for work. If the start to attend school after separating from their job, ODJFS will determine that they are no longer available for work due to school. Our client, however, attended school while he was working at base period employers. As a result, we showed the hearing officer that for this reason he should continue to be considered available. The hearing officer agreed and we won the hearing.
By investigating the breath tests being used against our client, we discovered that the breathalyzer that was used was not properly maintained and calibrated. Using this evidence, our client avoided second-in-ten OVI charges and the mandatory penalties that would have come with those charges.
After receiving her pandemic unemployment benefits, our client found the PUA system claiming show owed all of her benefits back along with a fraud penalty. We appealed these determinations and quickly obtained decision in her favor - eliminating the overpayment and fraud determinations.
Like many people, our client found his unemployment benefits denied due to a claim that he did not provide sufficient identity information. We represented him through a telephone hearing and won his unemployment benefits for him.
Our client was terminated when he was unable to work due to a medical issue. He found his unemployment benefits in jeopardy for being terminated with just cause and being unable to work. We showed that a termination due to being unable to work due to a bona fide medical issue is a termination without just cause. We further showed that our client received a release to work, though with restrictions, some weeks after. Therefore, he won his hearing by showing the termination was without just cause and that he was able to work.
Our client was charged with an OVI after the police initiated a traffic stop for a burnt out headlight and alleged improper turn, completing field sobriety tests, and obtaining a breath test that was over the limit. We aggressively defended against the charges raising issue with the traffic stop, obtaining a dismissal of the OVI charges.
Our client found her employer challenging her unemployment benefits. They claimed that they terminated her with just cause for failing to follow policies, failing to properly supervise subordinates, and failing to cooperate with an investigation. We showed the hearing officer that the employer lacked proof of every allegation it made and, as a result, the hearing officer concluded there was no just cause for termination. Our client's benefits were approved.
As a general rule, education employees do not receive unemployment compensation through the summer months if they have a reasonable assurance of employment in fall, though they may qualify if they have sufficient non-school employment. Our client worked at a head start program and found herself denied benefits because there was a claim that she had a reasonable assurance. However, we showed the hearing officer that head start programs are considered education employment only when the program is operated by a local board of education and staffed by employees of the board of education. Our client's head start program was operated by a non-profit organization, and as a result we obtained a decision approving her benefits.
Our client, like many, received a fraud determination from the Ohio PUA system demanding repayment of all benefits and assessing penalties. Through timely filing an appeal with required documentation, we obtained a decision eliminating the fraud finding, eliminating all penalties, and eliminating all overpayment demands.
After receiving her pandemic unemployment benefits, our client found herself denied with the PUA claiming that she was overpaid because she did not provide proof of employment or self-employment, or the planned commencement of employment. We helped our client to prepare for the hearing, submitting additional documentation, and we convinced the hearing officer that she had provided the needed documentation. As a result, she won the hearing, was approved for benefits, and had the overpayment eliminated.
After being approved for a temporary leave, our client returned to find her items had been boxed and a new employee in her position. She contacted HR who told her that she could apply for other positions. When she then applied for unemployment benefits, she found herself denied with the employer claiming she resigned. We showed ODJFS the facts and the law and, as a result, an appeal was granted in her favor approving benefits.
After our client was stopped for not having his headlights on, he quickly found himself subjected to field sobriety tests, arrested and providing a urine same that showed positive for alcohol. We raised issues regarding the lack of signs of impairment, the field sobriety tests and the reliability of the urine test result that also showed positive for glucose. When glucose is present, there is the possibility that the sample can ferment and create alcohol. As a result of these challenges, an agreement was reached to dismiss the OVI charges with our client pleading to a non-moving citation instead.
Our client received unemployment benefits only to find months later that ODJFS claimed show owed back months of her benefits due to being unable/unavailable for work. We researched the issue and found that ODJFS based this upon our client having given birth during her claims. However, she was only unable to work for two weeks after, which we confirmed with her medical provider. Through a hearing, we obtained a win - with the hearing officer concluding that she was only unable to work during two weeks and waiving any overpayment for those two weeks.
After our client's car got stuck, he found the police were called, he was arrested, and he was subjected to a urine test. Casual users of marijuana, even if they have a medical card, often find themselves subjected to OVI charges when urine test results come back showing use - even though not use on the day of citation. Through a thorough evaluation of the urine test results and raising issues with the tests, we were able to obtain a complete dismissal of all OVI charges against our client.
When a person is separated from a job because they have a bona fide medical condition that prevents them from working that job, it is a qualifying separation. However, to qualify for benefits every week, a person must be able to perform work. Our client was denied benefits because ODJFS determined that she was not able to work. We showed that, while she was not able to work the job she was separated from, she was able to work other jobs. As a result, we won her appeal for her.
Our client was terminated because he had a chair to sit in during his breaks and lunches. Through a hearing, we showed that employer lacked any evidence that he was using the chair instead of working, but was rather using the chair only during his breaks. As a result, the Hearing Officer found in his favor.
Our client found her employer fighting and appealing her unemployment, claiming they had just cause to terminated her for mistakes done at work. We prevailed at a hearing, showing the hearing officer that the mistakes were minor and the employer failed to follow its progressive discipline policy.