State ex rel. Robinson v. Industrial Commission

465 N.E.2d 78, 11 Ohio St. 3d 238, 11 Ohio B. 551, 1984 Ohio LEXIS 1146
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided June 27, 1984·No. No. 83-1154·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

“* * * Where there is no evidence upon which the commission could have based its factual conclusion an abuse of discretion is present and mandamus becomes appropriate.” State, ex rel. Kramer, v. Indus. [240] Comm. (1979), 59 Ohio St. 2d 39, 42 [13 O.O.3d 30]; State, ex rel. Mitchell, v. Robbins & Myers, Inc. (1983), 6 Ohio St. 3d 481, 483.

Appellant argues that there was no evidence upon which the commission could base its decision for the reason that Dr. Hardie did not specifically adopt the findings of the examining physicians in his report as required by State, ex rel. Wallace, v. Indus. Comm. (1979), 57 Ohio St. 2d 55, 61 [11 O.O.3d 216]. Appellant is correct that Dr. Hardie’s report is deficient in this regard; however, we find sufficient other evidence in the record to support the commission’s order.

Dr. Fallon concluded that appellant was “unemployable” as a result of illnesses associated with his diabetes and not his foot injury. Dr. Wehr concluded that as a result of his injury, appellant had a low impairment of fifteen percent. These opinions predate the allowance of the claim for aggravation of preexisting diabetes but were made giving consideration to the effect of appellant’s diabetes.

It is essentially appellant’s position that by reason of the allowance of the claim for aggravation of preexisting diabetes, he is entitled to have all aspects of his diabetic condition considered in determining whether he is permanently and totally disabled. This is incorrect. While it is unclear what the commission intended in granting this additional allowance, there is nothing in the record to suggest that it includes complications from appellant’s diabetes such as vision impairment or atherosclerosis which might contribute to his alleged total disability.

The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Celebrezze, C.J., W. Brown, Sweeney, Locher, Holmes, C. Brown and J. P. Celebrezze, JJ., concur.

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

State ex rel. Robinson v. Industrial Commission, 465 N.E.2d 78, 11 Ohio St. 3d 238, 11 Ohio B. 551, 1984 Ohio LEXIS 1146 (Ohio 1984).

465 N.E.2d 78 (State ex rel. Robinson v. Industrial Commission) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State ex rel. Greatorex v. Indus. Comm.
1997 Ohio 384 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1997)
State ex rel. Greatorex v. Industrial Commission
681 N.E.2d 916 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1997)