Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Koonce v. Industrial Commission

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided June 26, 1985No. 84-884PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

The court of appeals granted a writ of mandamus in this case to require the Industrial Commission to vacate its finding that appellant had fraudulently procured benefits. The court held that “the commission must make a finding that the claimant * * * [appellant] in fact did *62obtain the benefits through fraud,” and remanded the cause for that purpose.1 We agree with the court below. Where allegations of fraud are involved in a termination-of-benefits case, the Industrial Commission must make a specific finding as to the fraud issue. Mere conclusory statements in the commission’s pronouncement…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Teece v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1981
  2. State ex rel. Weimer v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1980
  3. State ex rel. Anderson v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1980
  4. State ex rel. Anderson v. StateOhio Supreme Court · 1979
  5. State ex rel. Norman v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1982

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Gatlin v. Yellow Freight System, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1985
  2. State ex rel. Youghiogheny & Ohio Coal Co. v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1992
  3. State ex rel. Brady v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1986

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API