State ex rel. Scott v. Indus. Comm.

Ohio Supreme Court

State ex rel. Scott v. Indus. Comm.

2003 Ohio 371, 98 Ohio St. 3d 286

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedFebruary 12, 2003

Docket2002-0899

StatusPublished

This text of 2003 Ohio 371 (State ex rel. Scott 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. Scott v. Indus. Comm., 2003 Ohio 371, 98 Ohio St. 3d 286 (Ohio 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

[Cite as State ex rel. Scott v. Indus. Comm., 98 Ohio St.3d 286, 2003-Ohio-371.]

THE STATE EX REL. SCOTT, APPELLANT, v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF OHIO, APPELLEE. [Cite as State ex rel. Scott v. Indus. Comm., 98 Ohio St.3d 286, 2003-Ohio- 371.] Workers’ compensation — Court of appeals’ judgment affirmed. (No. 2002-0899 — Submitted January 7, 2003 — Decided February 12, 2003.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, No. 01AP-822, 2002- Ohio-2240. __________________ {¶1} The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed consistent with the opinion of the court of appeals. MOYER, C.J., RESNICK, PFEIFER, COOK, LUNDBERG STRATTON and O’CONNOR, JJ., concur. F.E. SWEENEY, J., dissents. __________________ Law Office of Thomas Tootle Co., L.P.A., and Thomas Tootle, for appellant. Jim Petro, Attorney General, and Thomas L. Reitz, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee. __________________

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

[Cite as State ex rel. Scott v. Indus. Comm., 98 Ohio St.3d 286, 2003-Ohio-371.]

THE STATE EX REL. SCOTT, APPELLANT, v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF OHIO, APPELLEE. [Cite as State ex rel. Scott v. Indus. Comm., 98 Ohio St.3d 286, 2003-Ohio- 371.] Workers’ compensation — Court of appeals’ judgment affirmed. (No. 2002-0899 — Submitted January 7, 2003 — Decided February 12, 2003.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, No. 01AP-822, 2002- Ohio-2240. __________________ {¶1} The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed consistent with the opinion of the court of appeals. MOYER, C.J., RESNICK, PFEIFER, COOK, LUNDBERG STRATTON and O’CONNOR, JJ., concur. F.E. SWEENEY, J., dissents. __________________ Law Office of Thomas Tootle Co., L.P.A., and Thomas Tootle, for appellant. Jim Petro, Attorney General, and Thomas L. Reitz, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee. __________________

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2003 Ohio 371, 98 Ohio St. 3d 286, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-scott-v-indus-comm-ohio-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack