State ex rel. Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc. v. Indus. Comm.

Ohio Supreme Court

State ex rel. Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc. v. Indus. Comm.

2001 Ohio 1277, 92 Ohio St. 3d 537

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedAugust 15, 2001

Docket2000-2113

StatusPublished

This text of 2001 Ohio 1277 (State ex rel. Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc. 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. Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc. v. Indus. Comm., 2001 Ohio 1277, 92 Ohio St. 3d 537 (Ohio 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

[This decision has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 92 Ohio St.3d 537.]

THE STATE EX REL. EAGLE-PICHER INDUSTRIES, INC., APPELLEE, v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF OHIO, APPELLEE; WILLIAMS, APPELLANT. [Cite as State ex rel. Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc. v. Indus. Comm., 2001-Ohio-1277.] Workers’ compensation—Court of appeals’ judgment affirmed. (No. 00-2113—Submitted June 20, 2001—Decided August 15, 2001.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, No. 99AP-1069. __________________ {¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed consistent with the opinion of the court of appeals. MOYER, C.J., PFEIFER, COOK and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur. DOUGLAS, RESNICK and F.E. SWEENEY, JJ., dissent. __________________ ALICE ROBIE RESNICK, J., dissenting. {¶ 2} I would reverse the judgment of the court of appeals. DOUGLAS and F.E. SWEENEY, JJ., concur in the foregoing dissenting opinion. __________________ Bricker & Eckler, L.L.P., Bobbie S. Sprader and Thomas R. Sant, for appellee Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc. Betty D. Montgomery, Attorney General, and William J. McDonald, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee Industrial Commission of Ohio. Law Offices of Thomas Tootle Co., L.P.A., and Thomas Tootle, for appellant. __________________

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

[This decision has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 92 Ohio St.3d 537.]

THE STATE EX REL. EAGLE-PICHER INDUSTRIES, INC., APPELLEE, v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF OHIO, APPELLEE; WILLIAMS, APPELLANT. [Cite as State ex rel. Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc. v. Indus. Comm., 2001-Ohio-1277.] Workers’ compensation—Court of appeals’ judgment affirmed. (No. 00-2113—Submitted June 20, 2001—Decided August 15, 2001.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, No. 99AP-1069. __________________ {¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed consistent with the opinion of the court of appeals. MOYER, C.J., PFEIFER, COOK and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur. DOUGLAS, RESNICK and F.E. SWEENEY, JJ., dissent. __________________ ALICE ROBIE RESNICK, J., dissenting. {¶ 2} I would reverse the judgment of the court of appeals. DOUGLAS and F.E. SWEENEY, JJ., concur in the foregoing dissenting opinion. __________________ Bricker & Eckler, L.L.P., Bobbie S. Sprader and Thomas R. Sant, for appellee Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc. Betty D. Montgomery, Attorney General, and William J. McDonald, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee Industrial Commission of Ohio. Law Offices of Thomas Tootle Co., L.P.A., and Thomas Tootle, for appellant. __________________

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2001 Ohio 1277, 92 Ohio St. 3d 537, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-eagle-picher-industries-inc-v-indus-comm-ohio-2001.