State ex rel. Rhodeback v. Johnstown Mfg., Inc.
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
It is well-settled that the determination of disputed factual situations is within the jurisdiction of the Industrial Commission and subject to correction by an action in mandamus only upon a showing of abuse of discretion. State, ex rel. Haines, v. Indus. Comm. (1972), 29 Ohio St. 2d 15, 16 [58 O.O.2d 70]. The commission abuses its discretion when *117there is “no evidence” to support its factual conclusion. State, ex rel. Hutton, v. Indus. Comm. (1972), 29 Ohio St. 2d 9 [58 O.O.2d 66], syllabus. Thus, the issue in this case is whether there was some evidence in the commission’s file to support…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- State ex rel. Haines v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1972
- State ex rel. Wallace v. Industrlal CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1979
- State ex rel. Anderson v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1980
- State ex rel. Hutton v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1972
- State ex rel. Meeks v. Ohio Brass Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1984
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- State ex rel. Heilman v. Indus. Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 2024
- State ex rel. Heilman v. Indus. Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 2024
- State ex rel. Rouch v. Eagle Tool & Machine Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1986