Case Name: Jodka, Appellant, v. The City of Cleveland et al., Appellees
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 2015-03-12
Citations: 143 Ohio St. 3d 1201
Docket Number: No. 2014-0480
Parties: Jodka, Appellant, v. The City of Cleveland et al., Appellees.
Judges: O’Connor, C.J., and Lanzinger, Kennedy, and French, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Ohio State Reports, Third Service
Volume: 143
Pages: 1201–1201

Head Matter:
Jodka, Appellant, v. The City of Cleveland et al., Appellees.
[Cite as Jodka v. Cleveland, 143 Ohio St.3d 1201, 2015-Ohio-861.]
(No. 2014-0480
Submitted July 9, 2014
Decided March 12, 2015.)
Mayle, Ray & Mayle, L.L.C., Andrew R. Mayle, Jeremiah S. Ray, and Ronald J. Mayle; and Murray & Murray, Co. L.P.A., and John T. Murray, for appellant.
Barbara Langhenry, Director of Law, and Gary Singletary, Assistant Director of Law, for appellee city of Cleveland.
Baker & Hostetler, L.L.P., Gregory Y. Mersol, and Chris Bator, for appellees Affiliated Computer Services, Inc., Boulder Acquisition Corp., and Xerox Corp.

Opinion:
{¶ 1} The certification of conflict is dismissed, sua sponte, as having been improvidently certified.
O'Connor, C.J., and Lanzinger, Kennedy, and French, JJ., concur.
Pfeifer and O'Neill, JJ., dissent.
O'Donnell, J., not participating.