COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT
                       COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
                           NO. 73385
FRED G. BISBEE                   :
                                 :     ACCELERATED DOCKET
          Plaintiff-Appellant    :
                                 :       JOURNAL ENTRY
     vs.                         :
                                 :             AND
CUYAHOGA COUNTY BOARD OF         :
 ELECTIONS                       :
                                 :           OPINION
          Defendant-Appellee     :
                                 :         PER CURIAM
DATE OF ANNOUNCEMENT
OF DECISION:                             APRIL 16, 1998
CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING:         Civil appeal from
                                 Cleveland Municipal Court
                                 Case No. 95-CVI-21862
JUDGMENT:                        Reversed.
DATE OF JOURNALIZATION:
APPEARANCES:
For Plaintiff-Appellant:         For Defendant-Appellee:
REGINALD N. MAXTON, ESQ.         STEPHANIE TUBBS JONES, ESQ.
400 Lincoln Building             Cuyahoga County Prosecutor
1367 East Sixth Street           MICHAEL P. BUTLER, ESQ.
Cleveland, Ohio 44114            Assistant County Prosecutor
                                 8th Floor Justice Center
                                 1200 Ontario Street
                                 Cleveland, Ohio 44113
                               -2-
PER CURIAM:
     This is an accelerated appeal under App.R. 11.1, which by its
nature imports that our decision in this appeal will be in brief,
conclusory form.  Crawford v. Eastland Shopping Mall Assn. (1983),
11 Ohio App.3d 158.
     We, therefore, conclude the following assigned errors are well
taken and we reverse the small claims court's decision:
     I.   THE LOWER COURT COMMITTED ERROR IN RULING THAT THE
          BOARD OF ELECTIONS WRONGFULLY SUSPENDED AN EMPLOYEE
          IN BREACH OF CONTRACT.
     II.  THE LOWER COURT COMMITTED ERROR IN RULING IN FAVOR
          OF AN EMPLOYEE AND BY AWARDING DAMAGES AGAINST THE
          COUNTY BOARD  OF  ELECTIONS BASED  ON A  CLAIM  OF
           WRONGFUL SUSPENSION .
     Appellee Fred G. Bisbee sued his employer appellant Cuyahoga
Board of Elections for wrongful suspension and breach of contract.
Appellee was suspended for 30  days without pay for abuse of  his
sick time.   The small claims court  agreed with appellee on  the
breach of contract claim and found him to be both an at-will  and
public employee.   The court then  modified his suspension  after
finding that he had abused his sick time.  The court reduced  his
suspension to  a week  and ordered lost  wages in  the amount  of
$989.18.
     Appellant argues appellee is an at-will employee under  R.C.
3501.14, which mandates that employees serve at the discretion of
appellant.   Consequently, it argues  the trial  court could  not
impose damages.  We agree.
     This case is more  like Abbott v. Stephanik (1990), 64  Ohio
App.3d 719 than Mers v. Dispatch Printing Co. (1985), 19 Ohio St.3d
                               -3-
100. In Abbott, we held Mers and its progeny uncontrolling when a
statute  defines   an   employment   relationship   as   at-will.
Consequently, the Mers doctrine of promissory estoppel in an  at-
will employment relationship does not apply.  The Abbott rationale
is that the statute makes the relationship at-will and the employer
cannot alter  that fact by  entering into employment  agreements,
citing Malone v. Court of Common Pleas (1976), 45 Ohio St.2d 245.
     In this case, R.C. 3501.14 defines the employment relationship
of the parties in this case as at-will, and as a matter of law, the
trial court erred when it found otherwise.  Accordingly, the small
claims court erred when it awarded appellee lost wages.
     Judgment reversed.
     It is, therefore, considered that said appellant  recover of
said  appellee his costs herein.
     It is ordered that a special mandate be sent to said Court to
carry this judgment into execution.
     A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the  mandate
pursuant to Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure.
Exceptions.
                                   ______________________________
                                   PATRICIA ANN BLACKMON, A.J.
                                   ______________________________
                                   LEO M. SPELLACY, JUDGE
                                   ______________________________
                                   KENNETH A. ROCCO, JUDGE
     N.B.  This entry is an announcement of the court's decision.
See App.R. 22(B), 22(D) and 25(A); Loc. App.R. 27.  This decision
will be journalized and will become the judgment and order of the
court pursuant to App.R. 22(E), unless a motion for reconsideration
with supporting brief, per App.R. 26(A), is filed within ten (10)
days of the announcement of the court's decision.  The time period
for review by the Supreme Court of Ohio shall begin to run upon the
.