Employment & Labor

Subashi & Wildermuth represents businesses, not-for-profit entities, government entities, other employers and, on occasion, employees in matters involving employment law, labor disputes, discrimination, harassment, retaliation, workers compensation, benefits, employment contracts, and unfair labor practices.  Our attorneys are adept at dealing with all areas of the employment relationship from the beginning of the employment relationship to the conclusion, whether by retirement, termination, or resignation.

Our attorneys have litigated these matters in federal and state courts and administrative agencies throughout Ohio.  S&W offers counseling and litigation services for matters related to various state and federal laws including the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA), the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA), and the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the American with Disabilities Act.

Our experience in litigation allows us to preemptively address workplace disputes.  We have conducted or assisted in conducting investigations into employee misconduct and have advised and represented numerous employers in response to investigations by the OCRC, EEOC, and other agencies.

We also advise employers on how to develop policies and respond to situations to avoid investigations and litigation.  Specifically, our attorneys regularly advise employers on such matters as employee suspensions or terminations, requests for FMLA leave, and employee disability issues in order to ensure they comply with the increasing number of employment laws and regulations.  Along those same lines, we draft and review employee handbooks, negotiate employee contracts, and prepare severance agreements.

S&W is committed to providing timely and personal attention to our clients whether they are individuals, governments, small businesses, or large corporations.

Representative Experience

  • Turner v. Hamilton CSD (Oct. 2010), Butler Cty. Case No. 2009 CV 3044. Summary judgment in favor of school district in case alleging termination was the result of age and disability discrimination.  The decision was not appealed.
  • Ogilbee v. Bd. of Edn. of Dayton Pub. Schools (Apr.20, 2010), 2nd App. No. 23432, 2010 WL 1732715, 2010-Ohio-1913. Public school employee, who allegedly suffered from multiple chemical sensitivity, failed to establish that board of education treated the alleged impairment as substantially limiting a major life activity and, thus, failed to establish that she had a “disability,” precluding recovery on disparate-treatment discrimination claim.
  • State ex rel. Moeller v. City of Miamisburg, 2nd App. No. 22261, 2008 WL 867728, 2008-Ohio-1612. Summary judgment in favor of municipal employer in case alleging age discrimination and violations of the civil service rules in the selection of the City’s Fire Lieutenant.
  • Latham v. Central Community Health Bd. of Hamilton County, Inc., S.D. Ohio Case No. 1:05-CV-00343, 2006 WL 2010341 (July 17, 2006). Summary judgment in favor of the employer in claim alleging the employee’s position was eliminated due, in part, to gender and age discrimination.  

  • Senu-Oke v. Bd. of Edn. of Dayton City School Dist. (Sept. 7, 2005), 2nd App. No. 20967, 2005 WL 2403910. Summary judgment in case alleging racial and sexual discrimination and retaliation in employment termination.

*Please see Disclaimer


Comments are closed.