State ex rel. Smith v. Industrial Commission

553 N.E.2d 247, 50 Ohio St. 3d 45, 1990 Ohio LEXIS 132
CourtOhio Supreme Court
DecidedMarch 28, 1990
DocketNo. 88-1911
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 553 N.E.2d 247 (State ex rel. Smith v. Industrial Commission) 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. Smith v. Industrial Commission, 553 N.E.2d 247, 50 Ohio St. 3d 45, 1990 Ohio LEXIS 132 (Ohio 1990).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Temporary total disability compensation may be denied where a claimant voluntarily retires. State, ex rel. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp., v. Indus. Comm. (1985), 29 Ohio App. 3d 145, 29 OBR 162, 504 N.E. 2d 451. A retirement that is causally related to an industrial injury, however, is not voluntary. State, ex rel. Rockwell Internatl., v. Indus. Comm. (1988), 40 Ohio St. 3d 44, 531 N.E. 2d 678; State, ex rel. White Consolidated Industries, v. Indus. Comm. (1990), 48 Ohio St. 3d 17, 548 N.E. 2d 926. This determination is a factual question within the commission’s final jurisdiction. White, supra, at 18, 548 N.E. 2d at 927.

The appellate court’s ruling preceded our decisions in Rockwell and White. Upon review, however, we find that the appellate court nonetheless reached the proper result.

In contending that his retirement was involuntary, appellant claims that two factors motivated his decision to leave: (1) his April 22, 1985 industrial injury, and (2) the commission’s concurrent declaration of temporary total disability in another claim. The record, however, does not support either allegation.

The April 1, 1985 pension calculation form indicates that a June 1, 1985 retirement was contemplated prior to appellant’s alleged April 22, 1985 industrial injury. Further, there is no indication in the record that appellant was receiving temporary total disability compensation in any other claim during the several months preceding his retirement. While appellant’s condition may have worsened after retirement, it does not transform what was initially a voluntary non-injury retirement into an involuntary one.

Based on the foregoing, the appellate court judgment is affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Moyer, C.J., Sweeney, Holmes, Douglas, Wright, H. Brown and Resnick, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Heffernan v. Melrose Capital, Unpublished Decision (12-4-2007)
2007 Ohio 6532 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2007)
State ex rel. McCoy v. Dedicated Transport, Inc.
2002 Ohio 5305 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2002)
State ex rel. Crim v. Ohio Bur. of Workers' Comp.
2001 Ohio 1268 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2001)
State ex rel. Crim v. Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation
92 Ohio St. 3d 481 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2001)
Cosner v. Babcock & Wilcox Co.
636 N.E.2d 418 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1993)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
553 N.E.2d 247, 50 Ohio St. 3d 45, 1990 Ohio LEXIS 132, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-smith-v-industrial-commission-ohio-1990.