State ex rel. Hampe v. MTD Products, Inc.

84 Ohio St. 3d 422
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided February 10, 1999·No. No. 96-2734·Published

Opinions

Per Curiam.

Claimant alleges that the commission abused its discretion in (1) asserting jurisdiction to reexamine the district hearing officer’s December 7,1990 TTD award and (2) setting a retroactive TTD termination date. We agree with both assertions.

State ex rel. Nicholls v. Indus. Comm. (1998), 81 Ohio St.3d 454, 692 N.E.2d 188, and State ex rel. Russell v. Indus. Comm. (1998), 82 Ohio St.3d 516, 696 N.E.2d 1069, support claimant’s propositions. As to claimant’s first proposition, Nicholls held that the possibility of unspecified error cannot sustain the exercise of continuing jurisdiction under R.C. 4123.52. Russell, as to claimant’s other proposition, held that the date on which to terminate disputed TTD on the basis [424] of having reached MMI is the date of the termination hearing. The commission, therefore, abused its discretion in both regards.

Accordingly, the judgment of the court of appeals is reversed, and the commission is ordered to vacate its orders of July 6, 1992 and August 8, 1994, and to reinstate its earlier award of TTD.

Judgment reversed.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer and Cook, JJ., concur. Lundberg Stratton, J., concurs in part and dissents in part.

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

State ex rel. Hampe v. MTD Products, Inc., 84 Ohio St. 3d 422 (Ohio 1999).

84 Ohio St. 3d 422 (State ex rel. Hampe v. MTD Products, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State ex rel. Nicholls v. Industrial Commission
692 N.E.2d 188 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1998)
State ex rel. Russell v. Industrial Commission
696 N.E.2d 1069 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1998)