State ex rel. Koonce v. Industrial Commission
Ohio Supreme Court
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
- State ex rel. Teece v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1981
- State ex rel. Weimer v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1980
- State ex rel. Anderson v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1980
- State ex rel. Anderson v. StateOhio Supreme Court · 1979
- State ex rel. Norman v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1982
3Cited by3 opinions
- State ex rel. Gatlin v. Yellow Freight System, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1985
- State ex rel. Youghiogheny & Ohio Coal Co. v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1992
- State ex rel. Brady v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1986