State ex rel. Lynch v. Indus. Comm.

Ohio Supreme Court

State ex rel. Lynch v. Indus. Comm.

2001 Ohio 28, 91 Ohio St. 3d 246

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedApril 4, 2001

Docket2000-1396

StatusPublished

This text of 2001 Ohio 28 (State ex rel. Lynch 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. Lynch v. Indus. Comm., 2001 Ohio 28, 91 Ohio St. 3d 246 (Ohio 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

[This decision has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 91 Ohio St.3d 246.]

THE STATE EX REL. LYNCH, APPELLEE, v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF OHIO ET AL.; OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY, APPELLANT.

[Cite as State ex rel. Lynch v. Indus. Comm., 2001-Ohio-28.] Workers’ compensation—Court of appeals’ judgment affirmed. (No. 00-1396—Submitted February 27, 2001—Decided April 4, 2001.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, No. 99AP-1110. __________________ {¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed consistent with the opinion of the court of appeals. DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY and PFEIFER, JJ., concur. MOYER, C.J., COOK and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., dissent. __________________ COOK, J., dissenting. {¶ 2} Based on the rationale set forth in the decision of the court of appeals’ magistrate, I respectfully dissent. MOYER, C.J., and LUNDBERG STRATTON, J., concur in the foregoing dissenting opinion. __________________ Philip J. Fulton & Associates and Jonathan H. Goodman, for appellee. Betty D. Montgomery, Attorney General; Dinsmore & Shohl, L.L.P., and Michael L. Squillace, Special Counsel, 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 91 Ohio St.3d 246.]

THE STATE EX REL. LYNCH, APPELLEE, v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF OHIO ET AL.; OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY, APPELLANT.

[Cite as State ex rel. Lynch v. Indus. Comm., 2001-Ohio-28.] Workers’ compensation—Court of appeals’ judgment affirmed. (No. 00-1396—Submitted February 27, 2001—Decided April 4, 2001.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, No. 99AP-1110. __________________ {¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed consistent with the opinion of the court of appeals. DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY and PFEIFER, JJ., concur. MOYER, C.J., COOK and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., dissent. __________________ COOK, J., dissenting. {¶ 2} Based on the rationale set forth in the decision of the court of appeals’ magistrate, I respectfully dissent. MOYER, C.J., and LUNDBERG STRATTON, J., concur in the foregoing dissenting opinion. __________________ Philip J. Fulton & Associates and Jonathan H. Goodman, for appellee. Betty D. Montgomery, Attorney General; Dinsmore & Shohl, L.L.P., and Michael L. Squillace, Special Counsel, for appellant. __________________

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2001 Ohio 28, 91 Ohio St. 3d 246, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-lynch-v-indus-comm-ohio-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack