Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Thomas v. Industrial Commission

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided April 12, 1989No. 88-74PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Per curiam

In mandamus, the relator must establish a clear legal right to relief. State, ex rel. Pressley, v. Indus. Comm. (1967), 11 Ohio St. 2d 141, 40 O.O. 2d 141, 228 N.E. 2d 631. *33A clear legal right exists where the commission abuses its discretion by entering an order which is not supported by “some evidence.” State, ex rel. Burley, v. Coil Packing, Inc. (1987), 31 Ohio St. 3d 18, 31 OBR 70, 508 N.E. 2d 936. We must presently determine whether the commission abused its discretion in denying temporary total disability compensation from September 7, 1984 through May 24, 1985. Upon review, we find…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Pressley v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1967
  2. State ex rel. Burley v. Coil Packing, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1987
  3. State ex rel. Ramirez v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1982
  4. Craig v. Bureau of Unemployment CompensationOhio Court of Appeals · 1948
  5. State ex rel. Horne v. Great Lakes Construction Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1985

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. State ex rel. McGraw v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1990
  2. State ex rel. Wyse v. Ohio Pub. Emp. Retirement Sys.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2024
  3. State ex rel. Smith v. Ohio Pub. Emps. Retirement Sys.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2016
  4. State ex rel. Logan Clay Prods. Co. v. Indu. Comm.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2015
  5. State ex rel. R & L Shared Servs., L.L.C. v. Indus. Comm.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2016

2 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