State ex rel. Stuckenberg v. Industrial Commission

Ohio Supreme Court

State ex rel. Stuckenberg v. Industrial Commission

125 Ohio St. (N.S.) 651

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedApril 6, 1932

DocketNo. 23257

StatusPublished

This text of 125 Ohio St. (N.S.) 651 (State ex rel. Stuckenberg 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. Stuckenberg v. Industrial Commission, 125 Ohio St. (N.S.) 651 (Ohio 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

The court find that this defendant, the Industrial Commission of Ohio, had incorporated into the transcript filed in the court of common pleas of Hamilton [652]*652county, Ohio, in the case of Nora Stuckenberg v. Industrial Commission of Ohio, No. A-9253, all the testimony, the evidence, the records and papers which were before it at the original hearing and previous to the filing of the application for rehearing, and that by reason thereof the same are available for use in said case in the court of common pleas as evidence, subject to the competency of the entire file or parts thereof as may be offered by the plaintiff, to be passed upon by the trial judge; and that, therefore, the plaintiff is not entitled to a writ of mandamus as prayed for, and the petition is accordingly dismissed at the cost of relator.

Petition dismissed.

Jones, Matthias, Ahlen, Kinkade and Stephenson, JJ., concur.

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

The court find that this defendant, the Industrial Commission of Ohio, had incorporated into the transcript filed in the court of common pleas of Hamilton [652]*652county, Ohio, in the case of Nora Stuckenberg v. Industrial Commission of Ohio, No. A-9253, all the testimony, the evidence, the records and papers which were before it at the original hearing and previous to the filing of the application for rehearing, and that by reason thereof the same are available for use in said case in the court of common pleas as evidence, subject to the competency of the entire file or parts thereof as may be offered by the plaintiff, to be passed upon by the trial judge; and that, therefore, the plaintiff is not entitled to a writ of mandamus as prayed for, and the petition is accordingly dismissed at the cost of relator.

Petition dismissed.

Jones, Matthias, Ahlen, Kinkade and Stephenson, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

125 Ohio St. (N.S.) 651, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-stuckenberg-v-industrial-commission-ohio-1932.