Grim v. Cleveland Clinic Found.

1

2023-Ohio-713

JAMES GRIM, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CLEVELAND CLINIC FOUNDATION, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 111516

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth District, Cuyahoga

March 9, 2023

Civil Appeal from the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Case No. CV-19-918170

Michael T. Conway and Company, and Michael T. Conway, for appellant.

Frantz Ward LLP, Michael N. Chesney, Christopher G. Keim, and Megan E. Bennett for appellee.

JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION

LISA B. FORBES, P.J.:

{¶1} James Grim ("Grim") appeals the trial court's journal entry granting summary judgment against him, and in favor of the Cleveland Clinic Foundation ("CCF") regarding "the second cause of action in the complaint for race discrimination and retaliation in the alternative." Grim also appeals the jury verdict rendered against him, and in favor of CCF, regarding his "wrongful termination in violation of Ohio public policy tort claim," arguing that it was against the manifest weight of the evidence. After reviewing the facts of the case and pertinent law, we affirm the lower court's judgment.

I. Facts and Procedural History

{¶ 2} Grim was employed by CCF from February 16, 1998, to June 13, 2017, when he was terminated. Beginning in 2003, Grim's position with CCF was as a police officer.

{¶ 3} On May 23, 2017, at approximately 11:00 p.m., Dr. Kain Onwuzulike ("Dr. Onwuzulike"), who was employed by CCF as a neurosurgeon, arrived at CCF's main campus to address a family emergency. Dr. Onwuzulike left his personal SUV in what is known as the "J Circle" at the front entrance. According to Dr. Onwuzulike, the valet attendant told him he could park there, and Dr. Onwuzulike left his cell phone number with the attendant.

{¶ 4} Grim was working at the front entrance of the CCF main campus on May 23, 2017. He "felt" that Dr. Onwuzulike's vehicle was blocking his police cruiser. According to Grim, Dr. Onwuzulike ignored him when he asked Dr. Onwuzulike to move the SUV. Grim had a parking boot placed on Dr. Onwuzulike's vehicle. According to Grim, he did this because Dr. Onwuzulike was "rude."

{¶5} The valet attendant called Dr. Onwuzulike and told him he needed to come back outside to attend to his vehicle. When Dr. Onwuzulike returned, a confrontation between Grim and Dr. Onwuzulike ensued. According to Grim, Dr. Onwuzulike yelled, "B**ch! If you don't take that f****** boot off my car, I'm gonna kick your white cop a**!" Grim called for backup and placed Dr. Onwuzulike under arrest for disorderly conduct and aggravated menacing. According to Grim, Dr. Onwuzulike then said, "You're just a white bigot."

{¶ 6} On May 24, 2017, Grim prepared a CCF Police Incident Report. CCF launched an internal investigation of the incident between Grim and Dr. Onwuzulike and issued an Investigative Report.

{¶ 7} From these reports, CCF determined that Grim, along with backup officers who arrived on the scene, violated CCF's policies and procedures. CCF terminated Grim's employment, as reflected in a document titled "Termination," for "Improper Behavior/Misconduct" and "Poor Job Performance" because he was at the final step of CCF's progressive disciplinary policy. The Termination document established that Grim was subjected to the following "steps of Corrective Action within the previous two years":

11/30/2015 - Suspension - Failure to perform in courteous manner

6/24/2015 - Written Warning - Poor work performance

10/17/2014 - Documented Counseling - Professional attitude/Poor work performance

{¶ 8} On July 12, 2019, Grim filed a complaint against CCF and Dr. Onwuzulike^[1] alleging various causes of action including, relevant to this appeal: violations of RC. 4112.02(A) (workplace race discrimination); violations of R.C. 4112.02(I) (workplace retaliation); and wrongful termination in violation of public policy.

{¶ 9} The trial court granted in part and denied in part CCF's summary judgment motion on December 29, 2020. Pertinent to this appeal, the court granted summary judgment to CCF on Grim's race discrimination and retaliation claims. The court denied CCF's summary judgment motion on Grim's claim for wrongful termination in violation of public policy, finding that "what ultimately motivated [CCF in terminating Grim] is a factual question for the jury." This single claim went to trial, and on April 8, 2022, the jury found in favor of CCF.

{¶10} Grim now appeals, raising two assignments of error for review:

I. The trial court committed prejudicial and reversible error when it granted [CCF's] motion for summary judgment on the second cause of action in the complaint for race discrimination and retaliation in the alternative.

II. The jury verdict in the trial of * * * Grim's wrongful termination in violation of Ohio public policy tort claim in favor of [CCF] is against the manifest weight of the evidence and must be reversed under Ohio Appellate Rule 12(C)(2) given the jury response to interrogatory number one was * * * Grim did not prove by a preponderance of the evidence that his alleged efforts to enforce the laws of the state of Ohio were a deciding factor in [CCF's] decision to discharge him and the record including * * * CCF admissions show the exact opposite is true and cannot be reasonably disputed.

II. Law and Analysis

A. Summary Judgment 1. Standard of Review

{¶11} Appellate review of a trial court's decision granting summary judgment is de novo. Grafton v. Ohio Edison Co., 77 Ohio St.3d 102, 105, 671 N.E.2d 241 (1996). Pursuant to Civ.R. 56(C), the party seeking summary judgment must prove that (1) there is no genuine issue of material fact; (2) they are entitled to judgment as a matter of law; and (3) reasonable minds can come to but one conclusion and that conclusion is adverse to the nonmoving party. Dresher v. Burt, 75 Ohio St.3d 280, 662 N.E.2d 264 (1996).

2. CCF's Evidence

{¶12} In the instant case, attached to CCF's summary judgment motion is a "termination document" that CCF Police Commander Derrick Stovall ("Stovall"), who was one of Grim's supervisors, presented to Grim upon Grim's termination. This "termination document" states in part as follows:

• Upon review of [CCF] cameras that showed your patrol vehicle and [Dr. Onwuzulike's] vehicle in question, video of evidence shows you were not "pinned in." You could have backed the vehicle up to respond or move if needed.

• In booting the vehicle you placed the driver in a position that he would have to speak with you to have his vehicle released. A confrontation did ensue escalating a minor late-night parking issue into a bigger encounter.

• Your report indicated that the driver took his finger and poked you in the chest - which initiated the arrest. Upon review of [CCF] cameras and questioning of officers on scene, this action could not be substantiated.

• The driver shared that his child was brought to [CCF] Emergency. With this in mind, you failed to show compassion for his situation and family. You continued the arrest in front of his family, transported him to our Temporary Holding Facility, and then down to Cleveland City Jail. This was not handled in a professional manner towards the driver which you knew to be an employee.

Officer Grim, you have a documented history of service issues. Your decisions and actions created an environment that was hostile and vindictive which violate[s] the following sections of the Corrective Action Policy:

• K. Unacceptable or unsatisfactory job performance

• L. Failure to perform in a courteous, conscientious, and caring manner in responding to the needs of a caregiver.

• Z. Any conduct seriously detrimental to * * * fellow employees or [CCF] operations.

Due to the serious nature of this incident involving * * * a fellow employee, his family, and the patients that we serve, you are being administered a corrective action at the Termination level.

{¶13} CCF also attached several deposition transcripts to its summary judgment motion, the pertinent parts of which follow.

{¶14} Grim testified that the "J Circle" is not a no-parking zone; he put the boot on Dr. Onwuzulike's SUV because he felt Dr. Onwuzulike was dismissive and rude; he "agreed" that CCF's "appropriate protocol" was to "clear[] the use of the boot with a supervisor prior to using it; and he arrested Dr. Onwuzulike for "stepping inside my reach and poking at my chest * * *."

{¶15} In Dr. Onwuzulike's deposition, he testified that he never saw Grim before he entered the hospital, and he denied making any racist comments to Grim when he came back outside. Dr. Onwuzulike testified that he was attempting to talk to the valet attendant who had called him on his cellphone when Grim stepped in his way and engaged him.

{¶16} CCF Police Chief David Easthon testified that Grim had no authority to place a boot on someone's car and that Grim's conduct that night was because Grim "was going to teach the doctor a lesson."

{¶17} Stovall testified that Grim had no authority to place a boot on someone's car. He further testified that CCF police does not own a boot, and Grim got the boot in question from the third-party vendor that CCF uses for valet parking. He also testified that Grim was terminated for three reasons: severity of Grim's conduct in escalating the incident with Dr. Onwuzulike; "report writing"; and Grim's disciplinary history.

{¶18} Additionally, CCF attached to its summary judgment motion a copy of CCF's internal Investigative Report concerning Grim's conduct on the night in question. A detective and an inspector from CCF's Department of Protective Services conducted the investigation, which included interviewing Grim, along with five other CCF police officers who responded to the scene after Grim's call for backup. Documentary evidence shows that three of the five...