King v. Garnes
305 N.E.2d 798, 36 Ohio St. 2d 187, 65 Ohio Op. 2d 404, 1973 Ohio LEXIS 304
Opinion
Appellees contend that the filing was not timely because it was not filed within ten days after the administrator’s decision on reconsideration was mailed to appellant. However, an examination of the record discloses no evidence to show when the decision was, in fact, mailed, nor did the employer attempt to assert a date of mailing before the Board of Review.
The judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed.
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
King v. Garnes, 305 N.E.2d 798, 36 Ohio St. 2d 187, 65 Ohio Op. 2d 404, 1973 Ohio LEXIS 304 (Ohio 1973).
305 N.E.2d 798 (King v. Garnes) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Capparell v. Love
651 N.E.2d 484 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1994)
Geroc v. Ohio Veterinary Medical Board
525 N.E.2d 501 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1987)
Village of Moscow v. Ohio Unemployment Compensation Board of Review
491 N.E.2d 744 (Clermont County Court of Common Pleas, 1985)
McCruter v. Board of Review
415 N.E.2d 259 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1980)
Proctor v. Giles
400 N.E.2d 393 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1980)
Ridley v. Bureau of Motor Vehicles
361 N.E.2d 1350 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1976)
Checker Realty Co. v. Ohio Real Estate Commission
322 N.E.2d 139 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1974)
Wycuff v. Fotomat Corp.
311 N.E.2d 657 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1974)