TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

State ex rel. General Motors Corp. v. Industrial Commission

The State, ex rel. General Motors Corp., Chevrolet Motor Div. v. Industrial Commission of Ohio

State ex rel. Gen. Motors Corp. v. Indus. Comm'n, 337 N.E.2d 782 (Ohio 1975)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Ohio Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
November 12, 1975
Docket
No. 75-209
Judges
Brown, Celebrezze, Corrigan, Herbert, Neill, Stern
Citations
337 N.E.2d 78244 Ohio St. 2d 4673 Ohio Op. 2d 2311975 Ohio LEXIS 578

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Per Curiam.

In the recent case of State, ex rel. Commercial Motor Freight, v. Stebbins (1975), 42 Ohio St. 2d 389, 391 , this court held that an award of temporary total disability to an employee who had previously been awarded permanent partial disability was “clearly a determination as to the extent of disability. Claimant’s right to partid- *48 pate in the fund had previously been established. Hence, the order allowing temporary total disability was not ap-pealable, and Commercial Motor Freight’s only available remedy was an original action in mandamus.”

In this case, the award of permanent partial disability to claimant was a determination as to the extent of disability, and was not appealable. * Relator’s only remedy was, therefore, an action in mandamus.

On authority of Commercial Motor Freight, supra, the judgment of the Court of Appeals dismissing the relator’s action in mandamus is reversed, and the cause is remanded to that court to hear the merits of relator’s complaint in mandamus.

Judgment reversed.

O’Neill, C. J., Herbert, Corrigan, Stern, Celebrezze, W. Brown and P. Brown, JJ., concur.

R. C. 4123.519, as pertinent here, provides:

“The claimant or the employer may appeal a decision of the Industrial Commission in any injury case, other than a decision as to the extent of disability * * * .”

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1978: 21981: 119782026peak 1978 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Zavatsky v. Stringer384 N.E.2d 693 (Ohio 1978)
  2. Smith v. Krouse377 N.E.2d 493 (Ohio 1978)
  3. Gilbert v. Midland-Ross Corp.423 N.E.2d 847 (Ohio 1981)

Most recent

  1. Gilbert v. Midland-Ross Corp.423 N.E.2d 847 (Ohio 1981)
  2. Zavatsky v. Stringer384 N.E.2d 693 (Ohio 1978)
  3. Smith v. Krouse377 N.E.2d 493 (Ohio 1978)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
State ex rel. Commercial Motor Freight, Inc. v. Stebbins, 329 N.E.2d 102 (Ohio 1975) 6

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list