State ex rel. Peters v. Industrial Commission

Ohio Supreme Court

State ex rel. Peters v. Industrial Commission

103 Ohio St. 3d 472

Ohio Supreme Court·Decided November 10, 2004·No. No. 2003-2081·Published

Opinion

{¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed consistent with the opinion of the court of appeals.

Moyer, C.J., Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor and O’Donnell, JJ., concur. Law Offices of Thomas Tootle Co., L.P.A., and Thomas Tootle, for appellant. Jim Petro, Attorney General, and Keith Blosser, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee Industrial Commission of Ohio. Thompson Hiñe, L.L.P., and Philip B. Cochran, for appellee Sugar Creek Packing Company. Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., dissent and would reverse the judgment of the court of appeals.

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

{¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed consistent with the opinion of the court of appeals.

Moyer, C.J., Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor and O’Donnell, JJ., concur. Law Offices of Thomas Tootle Co., L.P.A., and Thomas Tootle, for appellant. Jim Petro, Attorney General, and Keith Blosser, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee Industrial Commission of Ohio. Thompson Hiñe, L.L.P., and Philip B. Cochran, for appellee Sugar Creek Packing Company. Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., dissent and would reverse the judgment of the court of appeals.

State ex rel. Peters v. Industrial Commission, 103 Ohio St. 3d 472 (Ohio 2004).

Pincite

103 Ohio St. 3d 472 (State ex rel. Peters v. Industrial Commission) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.