State ex rel. Pearson v. Indus. Comm.

Ohio Supreme Court

State ex rel. Pearson v. Indus. Comm.

1998 Ohio 258, 82 Ohio St. 3d 180

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedJune 17, 1998

Docket1995-2140

StatusPublished

This text of 1998 Ohio 258 (State ex rel. Pearson 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. Pearson v. Indus. Comm., 1998 Ohio 258, 82 Ohio St. 3d 180 (Ohio 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 82 Ohio St.3d 180.]

THE STATE EX REL. PEARSON, APPELLANT, v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF OHIO ET AL., APPELLEES. [Cite as State ex rel. Pearson v. Indus. Comm., 1998-Ohio-258.] Workers’ compensation—Court of appeals’ judgment affirmed. (No. 95-2140—Submitted May 12, 1998—Decided June 17, 1998.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, No. 94APD08-1240. __________________ Kondritzer, Gold, Frank & Crowley Co., L.P.A., and Lane N. Cohen, for appellant. Betty D. Montgomery, Attorney General, and William D. Haders, Assistant Attorney General, for appellees. __________________ {¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed. MOYER, C.J., PFEIFER, COOK and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur. DOUGLAS, RESNICK and F.E. SWEENEY, JJ., dissent. __________________ ALICE ROBIE RESNICK, J., dissenting. {¶ 2} I would reverse the judgment of the court of appeals and grant relief consistent with State ex rel. Gay v. Mihm (1994), 68 Ohio St.3d 315, 626 N.E.2d 666, by ordering the Industrial Commission to allow compensation for permanent total disability. DOUGLAS and F.E. SWEENEY, JJ., concur in the foregoing dissenting opinion. __________________

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 82 Ohio St.3d 180.]

THE STATE EX REL. PEARSON, APPELLANT, v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF OHIO ET AL., APPELLEES. [Cite as State ex rel. Pearson v. Indus. Comm., 1998-Ohio-258.] Workers’ compensation—Court of appeals’ judgment affirmed. (No. 95-2140—Submitted May 12, 1998—Decided June 17, 1998.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, No. 94APD08-1240. __________________ Kondritzer, Gold, Frank & Crowley Co., L.P.A., and Lane N. Cohen, for appellant. Betty D. Montgomery, Attorney General, and William D. Haders, Assistant Attorney General, for appellees. __________________ {¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed. MOYER, C.J., PFEIFER, COOK and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur. DOUGLAS, RESNICK and F.E. SWEENEY, JJ., dissent. __________________ ALICE ROBIE RESNICK, J., dissenting. {¶ 2} I would reverse the judgment of the court of appeals and grant relief consistent with State ex rel. Gay v. Mihm (1994), 68 Ohio St.3d 315, 626 N.E.2d 666, by ordering the Industrial Commission to allow compensation for permanent total disability. DOUGLAS and F.E. SWEENEY, JJ., concur in the foregoing dissenting opinion. __________________

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1998 Ohio 258, 82 Ohio St. 3d 180, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-pearson-v-indus-comm-ohio-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack