State ex rel. Davenport v. Indus. Comm.

Ohio Supreme Court

State ex rel. Davenport v. Indus. Comm.

2000 Ohio 154, 89 Ohio St. 3d 271

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 12, 2000

Docket1999-2033

StatusPublished

This text of 2000 Ohio 154 (State ex rel. Davenport v. Indus. Comm.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State ex rel. Davenport v. Indus. Comm., 2000 Ohio 154, 89 Ohio St. 3d 271 (Ohio 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 89 Ohio St.3d 271.]

THE STATE EX REL. DAVENPORT, APPELLANT, v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF OHIO ET AL., APPELLEES. [Cite as State ex rel. Davenport v. Indus. Comm., 2000-Ohio-154.] Workers’ compensation—Court of appeals’ judgment affirmed. (No. 99-2033—Submitted May 23, 2000—Decided July 12, 2000.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, No. 98AP-1350. __________________ Philip J. Fulton & Associates and William A. Thorman III, for appellant. Betty D. Montgomery, Attorney General, and Gerald H. Waterman, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee Industrial Commission. Vorys, Sater, Seymour & Pease, Theodore P. Mattis and Thomas M. Taggart, for appellee Ranco, Inc. __________________ {¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed consistent with the opinion of the court of appeals. MOYER, C.J., RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur. DOUGLAS, J., dissents. __________________

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 89 Ohio St.3d 271.]

THE STATE EX REL. DAVENPORT, APPELLANT, v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF OHIO ET AL., APPELLEES. [Cite as State ex rel. Davenport v. Indus. Comm., 2000-Ohio-154.] Workers’ compensation—Court of appeals’ judgment affirmed. (No. 99-2033—Submitted May 23, 2000—Decided July 12, 2000.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, No. 98AP-1350. __________________ Philip J. Fulton & Associates and William A. Thorman III, for appellant. Betty D. Montgomery, Attorney General, and Gerald H. Waterman, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee Industrial Commission. Vorys, Sater, Seymour & Pease, Theodore P. Mattis and Thomas M. Taggart, for appellee Ranco, Inc. __________________ {¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed consistent with the opinion of the court of appeals. MOYER, C.J., RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur. DOUGLAS, J., dissents. __________________

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2000 Ohio 154, 89 Ohio St. 3d 271, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-davenport-v-indus-comm-ohio-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack