Legal Opinion

State ex rel. AutoZone, Inc. v. Industrial Commission

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided February 21, 2008No. 2006-1421PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPfeifer, J.

{¶ 1} Today we hold that the Industrial Commission does not abuse its discretion when it finds that a claimant has suffered “the loss of the sight of an eye” under R.C. 4123.57(B) when a doctor diagnoses the claimant as “legally blind” in that eye due to an industrial injury. We thus affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.

Factual and Procedural Background

{¶ 2} On January 16, 2004, Stephen Gaydosh, an employee of AutoZone, Inc., perforated his left eye with a screwdriver while installing a wiper blade. Gay-dosh’s workers’ compensation claim was allowed for “perforated globe left eye.”

{¶…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Pressley v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1967
  2. State ex rel. Elliott v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1986
  3. State ex rel. Rouch v. Eagle Tool & Machine Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1986
  4. State ex rel. Kroger Co. v. StoverOhio Supreme Court · 1987
  5. State ex rel. Avalon Precision Casting Co. v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2006

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Seibert v. Richard Cyr, Inc. (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2019
  2. State ex rel. Kroger Co. v. JohnsonOhio Supreme Court · 2011
  3. State Ex Rel. Smith v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2014
  4. State v. EdwardsOhio Court of Appeals · 2013
  5. State ex rel. Bennett v. Indus. Comm.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2016

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API