State ex rel. Crosby v. Department of Mental Retardation [& Developmental Disabilities]
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
The determination of disputed factual situations is within the final jurisdiction of the commission, subject to correction by action in mandamus only upon a showing of an abuse of discretion. State, ex rel. Allied Wheel Products, Inc., v. Indus. Comm. (1956), 166 Ohio St. 47, 1 O.O. 2d 190, 139 N.E. 2d 41. Where the record con*180tains some evidence to support the commission’s findings, there has been no abuse of discretion and mandamus will not lie. State, ex rel. Burley, v. Coil Packing, Inc. (1987), 31 Ohio St. 3d 18, 31 OBR 70, 508 N.E. 2d 936.
Relator-appellant contends that the reports of…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- State ex rel. Burley v. Coil Packing, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1987
- State ex rel. Ramirez v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1982
- State ex rel. Mitchell v. Robbins & Myers, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1983
- State ex rel. Anderson v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1980
- State ex rel. Horne v. Great Lakes Construction Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1985
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- State v. SchiebelOhio Supreme Court · 1990
- State ex rel. Burroughs v. Ohio Hwy. Patrol Retirement Sys. Bd. (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2017
- State ex rel. Cleveland Browns Football, Co., L.L.C. v. Indus. Comm.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2017
- State ex rel. Seabolt v. State Hwy. Patrol Retirement Sys.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2018