State ex rel. Ferris v. Industrial Commission

Ohio Supreme Court

State ex rel. Ferris v. Industrial Commission

245 N.E.2d 357, 17 Ohio St. 2d 49, 46 Ohio Op. 2d 266, 1969 Ohio LEXIS 413

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedMarch 5, 1969

DocketNo. 68-378

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 245 N.E.2d 357 (State ex rel. Ferris v. Industrial Commission) 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. Ferris v. Industrial Commission, 245 N.E.2d 357, 17 Ohio St. 2d 49, 46 Ohio Op. 2d 266, 1969 Ohio LEXIS 413 (Ohio 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This action in mandamus originated in the Court of Appeals which dismissed it on the ground that relator had an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law.

In this action, relator seeks to have set aside a decision of the Administrator of the Bureau of Workmen’s Compensation in an injury case ordering that no further [50]*50compensation be awarded to relator. This decision was not a decision as to the extent of disability.

Thus, Sections 4123.516 and 4123.519, Revised Code, provide relator with administrative and court appeals from the decision which he seeks to have set aside in this mandamus action. Paragraph one of the syllabus of State, ex rel. Benton, v. C. & S. O. Elec. Co. (1968), 14 Ohio St. 2d 130, 237 N. E. 2d 134, and paragraph three of the syllabus of State, ex rel. Pressley, v. Indus. Comm. (1967), 11 Ohio St. 2d 141, 228 N. E. 2d 631, require an affirmance of the judgment of the Court of Appeals.

Judgment affirmed.

Tart, C. j., Zimmerman, Matthias, O’Neill, Schneider, Cole and Duncan, JJ., concur. Cole, J., of the Third Appellate District, sitting for Herbert, J.

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

Per Curiam.

This action in mandamus originated in the Court of Appeals which dismissed it on the ground that relator had an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law.

In this action, relator seeks to have set aside a decision of the Administrator of the Bureau of Workmen’s Compensation in an injury case ordering that no further [50]*50compensation be awarded to relator. This decision was not a decision as to the extent of disability.

Thus, Sections 4123.516 and 4123.519, Revised Code, provide relator with administrative and court appeals from the decision which he seeks to have set aside in this mandamus action. Paragraph one of the syllabus of State, ex rel. Benton, v. C. & S. O. Elec. Co. (1968), 14 Ohio St. 2d 130, 237 N. E. 2d 134, and paragraph three of the syllabus of State, ex rel. Pressley, v. Indus. Comm. (1967), 11 Ohio St. 2d 141, 228 N. E. 2d 631, require an affirmance of the judgment of the Court of Appeals.

Judgment affirmed.

Tart, C. j., Zimmerman, Matthias, O’Neill, Schneider, Cole and Duncan, JJ., concur. Cole, J., of the Third Appellate District, sitting for Herbert, J.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

245 N.E.2d 357, 17 Ohio St. 2d 49, 46 Ohio Op. 2d 266, 1969 Ohio LEXIS 413, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-ferris-v-industrial-commission-ohio-1969.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack