State ex rel. Haywood v. Indus. Comm.

Ohio Supreme Court

State ex rel. Haywood v. Indus. Comm.

1998 Ohio 161, 83 Ohio St. 3d 129

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedSeptember 16, 1998

Docket1996-2256

StatusPublished

This text of 1998 Ohio 161 (State ex rel. Haywood 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. Haywood v. Indus. Comm., 1998 Ohio 161, 83 Ohio St. 3d 129 (Ohio 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 83 Ohio St.3d 129.]

THE STATE EX REL. HAYWOOD, APPELLEE, v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF OHIO, APPELLANT. [Cite as State ex rel. Haywood v. Indus. Comm., 1998-Ohio-161.] Workers’ compensation—Court of appeals’ judgment affirmed. (No. 96-2256—Submitted July 8, 1998—Decided September 16, 1998.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, No. 95APD10-1302. __________________ Butler, Cincione, Dicuccio, Dritz & Barnhart and David B. Barnhart, for appellee. Betty D. Montgomery, Attorney General, and Craigg E. Gould, Assistant Attorney General, for appellant. __________________ {¶ 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 and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur. DOUGLAS and COOK, JJ., dissent. __________________

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 83 Ohio St.3d 129.]

THE STATE EX REL. HAYWOOD, APPELLEE, v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF OHIO, APPELLANT. [Cite as State ex rel. Haywood v. Indus. Comm., 1998-Ohio-161.] Workers’ compensation—Court of appeals’ judgment affirmed. (No. 96-2256—Submitted July 8, 1998—Decided September 16, 1998.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, No. 95APD10-1302. __________________ Butler, Cincione, Dicuccio, Dritz & Barnhart and David B. Barnhart, for appellee. Betty D. Montgomery, Attorney General, and Craigg E. Gould, Assistant Attorney General, for appellant. __________________ {¶ 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 and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur. DOUGLAS and COOK, JJ., dissent. __________________

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1998 Ohio 161, 83 Ohio St. 3d 129, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-haywood-v-indus-comm-ohio-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack