The Ohio Court of Appeals upheld a lower court's decision to dismiss a case involving Robert Denham, a former custodian for Columbus City Schools. The court ruled that Denham was properly terminated due to his prior conviction for aggravated robbery, which is classified as an "absolute bar offense" under Ohio law. This ruling affects not only Denham but also sets a precedent for how school districts handle similar situations involving employees with criminal records.
Denham's case stemmed from his employment history with Columbus City Schools. Initially hired in 2008, he was terminated due to a criminal conviction. After being rehired in 2022, he received a letter in 2023 stating that he was ineligible for continued employment because of his past conviction. The court's ruling on July 31, 2026, is significant as it clarifies the legal implications for school districts when they learn about an employee's disqualifying criminal history.
Robert Denham was employed as a custodian for Columbus City Schools until 2008 when he was terminated due to a conviction for aggravated robbery. He was rehired in 2022, but on August 28, 2023, the school district informed him he was ineligible for continued employment under Ohio Revised Code 3319.391. This law mandates that individuals with certain criminal convictions cannot be employed by school districts. Denham argued that his termination violated Ohio administrative code, which states that employees should not be terminated for convictions that the district was aware of prior to the effective date of the rule.
The case reached the Ohio Court of Appeals after Denham filed a complaint in the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas in November 2024, seeking a declaratory judgment that his termination was unlawful. Columbus City Schools responded with a motion to dismiss, which the court granted, leading to Denham's appeal. The appellate court reviewed the case under a de novo standard, meaning they reassessed the facts without deferring to the lower court's judgment.
The court ruled that Columbus City Schools acted within its rights to terminate Denham's employment due to his prior conviction. Judge Boggs, writing for the court, stated, "Columbus City Schools was permitted to take corrective action upon learning of an improper rehiring, especially when the mistake involves a violation of statutory law." The court concluded that Denham's interpretation of the administrative code was incorrect and that the law allows school districts discretion in handling cases where an employee is mistakenly rehired.
Denham's argument that the trial court improperly applied the law was also rejected. The appellate court found that the law did not retroactively apply in this case. Judge Boggs noted that the law was prospective and did not impair any vested rights Denham might have had. The court affirmed the lower court's ruling, stating that there was no justiciable controversy regarding Denham's termination.
The ruling has implications for other employees with similar backgrounds and school districts across Ohio. It clarifies that school districts can take corrective action if they mistakenly hire someone who is ineligible due to a criminal conviction. This decision reinforces the importance of background checks and adherence to employment regulations in educational institutions.
Moving forward, Denham may consider appealing the decision to the Ohio Supreme Court, but details on whether he will do so have not been disclosed. This case highlights the ongoing challenges faced by individuals with criminal records seeking employment in public sectors, particularly in schools.