State ex rel. Loral Systems Group v. Industrial Commission

570 N.E.2d 1106, 59 Ohio St. 3d 112, 1991 Ohio LEXIS 1041
CourtOhio Supreme Court
DecidedMay 1, 1991
DocketNo. 89-1050
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 570 N.E.2d 1106 (State ex rel. Loral Systems Group 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. Loral Systems Group v. Industrial Commission, 570 N.E.2d 1106, 59 Ohio St. 3d 112, 1991 Ohio LEXIS 1041 (Ohio 1991).

Opinions

Per Curiam.

An award under former R.C. 4123.57(A) requires not only “some evidence” of actual impaired earning capacity, but also “some evidence” causally relating the impairment to the allowed conditions. State, ex rel. Apgar, v. Indus. Comm. (1989), 42 Ohio St. 3d 5, 535 N.E. 2d 1364. The latter element is missing here.

Claimant has submitted no evidence showing that her lack of wages is due to the twenty-five percent impairment noted by Dr. Rosen. We will not speculate as to whether her lack of earnings is attributable to the allowed conditions or is due to, for example, a voluntary decision not to work for reasons unrelated to her injury. Absent proof of causal relationship, claimant is not entitled to an award for impaired earning capacity.

We further conclude that the appellate court erred in returning the cause to the commission for an amended order identifying the nonmedical disability factors relied on in determining the percentage of permanent partial disability. Two relevant orders were issued here. Claimant’s percentage of permanent partial disability was determined in the first, not the second, commission order, and this first order was not administratively appealed. Accordingly, the first order is not at issue.

For the reasons set forth above, the judgment of the court of appeals is reversed, and the writ of mandamus is allowed.

Judgment reversed and writ allowed.

Moyer, C.J., Holmes, Wright and H. Brown, JJ., concur. Sweeney, Douglas and Res-nick, JJ., dissent.

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

Related

State ex rel. Garon v. Univ. Hosp. of Cleveland
2000 Ohio 329 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2000)
State ex rel. Garon v. University Hospitals
88 Ohio St. 3d 288 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2000)
State ex rel. Matheney v. Central Ohio Coal Co.
723 N.E.2d 570 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2000)
State ex rel. Matheney v. Cent. Ohio Coal Co.
2000 Ohio 268 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2000)
State ex rel. Mount Carmel Health v. Forte
603 N.E.2d 1014 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
570 N.E.2d 1106, 59 Ohio St. 3d 112, 1991 Ohio LEXIS 1041, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-loral-systems-group-v-industrial-commission-ohio-1991.