State ex rel. Schmidt v. Indus. Comm.

Ohio Supreme Court

State ex rel. Schmidt v. Indus. Comm.

2000 Ohio 20, 90 Ohio St. 3d 71

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedSeptember 20, 2000

Docket2000-0055

StatusPublished

This text of 2000 Ohio 20 (State ex rel. Schmidt 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. Schmidt v. Indus. Comm., 2000 Ohio 20, 90 Ohio St. 3d 71 (Ohio 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 90 Ohio St.3d 71.]

THE STATE EX REL. SCHMIDT, APPELLANT, v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF OHIO ET AL., APPELLEES. [Cite as State ex rel. Schmidt v. Indus. Comm., 2000-Ohio-20.] Workers’ compensation—Court of appeals’ judgment affirmed. (No. 00-55—Submitted July 25, 2000—Decided September 20, 2000.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, No. 98AP-1332. __________________ Fell & Marcus Co., L.P.A., and George N. Fell II, for appellant. Betty D. Montgomery, Attorney General, and Dennis H. Behm, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee Industrial Commission of Ohio. Bugbee & Conkle and Richard L. Johnson, for appellee Tecumseh Products Company. __________________ {¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed consistent with the opinion of the court of appeals. 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 order the Industrial Commission to comply with State ex rel. Noll v. Indus. Comm. (1991), 57 Ohio St.3d 203, 567 N.E.2d 245. 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 90 Ohio St.3d 71.]

THE STATE EX REL. SCHMIDT, APPELLANT, v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF OHIO ET AL., APPELLEES. [Cite as State ex rel. Schmidt v. Indus. Comm., 2000-Ohio-20.] Workers’ compensation—Court of appeals’ judgment affirmed. (No. 00-55—Submitted July 25, 2000—Decided September 20, 2000.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, No. 98AP-1332. __________________ Fell & Marcus Co., L.P.A., and George N. Fell II, for appellant. Betty D. Montgomery, Attorney General, and Dennis H. Behm, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee Industrial Commission of Ohio. Bugbee & Conkle and Richard L. Johnson, for appellee Tecumseh Products Company. __________________ {¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed consistent with the opinion of the court of appeals. 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 order the Industrial Commission to comply with State ex rel. Noll v. Indus. Comm. (1991), 57 Ohio St.3d 203, 567 N.E.2d 245. DOUGLAS and F.E. SWEENEY, JJ., concur in the foregoing dissenting opinion. __________________

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2000 Ohio 20, 90 Ohio St. 3d 71, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-schmidt-v-indus-comm-ohio-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack