Opinion ID: 6329210
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: issues

Text: The long-standing relationship between Cyrus, the University, and OOD soured once Cyrus expanded his food-services operation to include a catering component. The Grantor Agreement does not directly mention catering services, but it envisions “delivery services.” (Grantor Agreement, Ex. B, R. 2-1, PageID # 43). Even though the agreement itself does not specify catering, Cyrus asserts that University personnel and BSVI representatives assured him that the Grantor Agreements posed no barrier to him expanding his services with a catering component. In reliance on these representations, Cyrus avers that he purchased Universityapproved catering equipment, invested personal financial resources, and hired employees, including an executive chef, a sous-chef, and an operations manager. Soon after catering operations commenced, the University protested, contending that the parties’ contracts did not contemplate catering.4 The University food service employees’ union filed a grievance and agreed with the University that the pre-existing collective bargaining agreement prevented Cyrus from engaging in catering activities. Frustrated with the union’s position, Cyrus filed suit and sought injunctive relief from the district court to continue the catering operations. Separately, at some point in early 2019, Cyrus and his staff noticed missing inventory from the unlocked storage area used by Cyrus on the Health Science Campus. Consistent with its statutory duty under the mini-RSA, OOD provided Cyrus with an initial inventory for the kiosk in July 2018. Ohio Admin. Code 3304:1-21-05(C). This inventory was stored in the University’s Mumford Library basement, adjacent to the food preparation area. The storage space had a pulldown metal security partition; however, the University had not installed a hasp to accommodate a 4 The University of Toledo runs its own catering operation, called the Food and Nutrition Services. (Catering Policy, Ex. A, R. 12-1). -4- No. 20-3913, Cyrus v. Univ. of Toledo, et al. padlock. Because there were no active security cameras, the storage area remained unlocked and unwatched. Cyrus attests that he has been instructed over the years that absent an emergency, a vendor should not contact the police directly about vending operations but should go through OOD’s local representative. Accordingly, as indicated below, beginning at least in February 2019, Cyrus notified Lynette Hustwick, OOD’s local representative, of the missing inventory and the lack of security: February 1, 2019: Lyn, When are we going to be able to access the security camera’s by the coffee kiosk? Amy is reporting that there are a number of items that are showing up missing. May 1, 2019: Lyn, We are still seeing a large amount of theft from the Market Café. Deena the manager is reporting whole bottle of syrups are waking from upstairs and over the weekend the staffs tip money was stolen from the Market Café. It look like bags of coffee are being stolen as well. I not sure if they are being taken from downstairs or from upstairs at this point . . . Our food costs/Starbucks inventory costs are running well above what it should be. The matter of theft and security cameras need to be addressed. May 5, 2019: Hi Lyn; Theft has been reported again and again to both UT and [the Bureau] . . . The clear attitude that I have gotten from both UT and [the Bureau] about theft, is at best total indifference . . . What immediate steps will UT and BEP be taking to help in this matter? June 14, 2019: Hi Lyn; FYI; we had Starbucks deliver a pallet of product yesterday and we had to order another pallet for delivery next week. Do we have a date certain on securing the storage area yet? August 22, 2019: Hi Lyn; We are still seeing stuff missing in the large storage room. David is reporting that there is at least (150 five hours energy drinks missing from the large storage room this morning. They are stored right behind the cages that we have the Starbucks inventory stored. (Pl.’s Br. at 6–7 (quoting Mot. to Enforce Settlement Agreement, R. 41-1, PageID ## 572–76) (verbatim e-mail communications)). A hasp was eventually installed to secure the inventory -5- No. 20-3913, Cyrus v. Univ. of Toledo, et al. storage area on July 17, 2019. After the installation, Cyrus reports that the loss of missing inventory came to an end.5