Legal Opinion

State, Ex Rel. v. Indus. Comm.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided April 11, 1945No. 30102PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Was the Industrial Commission guilty of gross abuse of discretion in denying the relator's application for an additional award of compensation?

The sole claim of the relator is that his employer, the Toledo Plastics Company, violated a specific safety requirement in failing to provide a proper guard for the machine in use at the time of the injury.

Section 35 of Article II of the Constitution of Ohio provides in part that the Industrial Commission or board "shall have full power and authority to hear and determine whether or not an injury, disease or death resulted because of the failure of the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State, Ex Rel. v. Indus. Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 1939
  2. State, Ex Rel. v. Indus. Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 1933

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. State v. Ohio Stove Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1950
  2. State, Ex Rel. v. Ind. Com.Ohio Supreme Court · 1948
  3. State ex rel. Devore Roofing & Painting v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2004
  4. State ex rel. Capital City Excavating Co. v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1978
  5. McCoy v. State, Ohio Department of Rehabilitation & CorrectionOhio Court of Appeals · 1986

5 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