State, Ex Rel. v. Indus. Comm.
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
The decision in this case turns on whether Section 1465-90, General Code, as amended in 1937, authorizing a rehearing upon discontinuance of compensation, applies, or whether such section in its previous form is controlling.
Counsel for the relator frankly concede that if Section 1465-90, General Code, as in force until July 3, 1937, is applicable, the relator has no standing in court, under the decisions in State, ex rel. Depalo, v. Industrial Commission,128 Ohio St. 410, 191 N.E. 691, and Noggle v. IndustrialCommission, 129 Ohio St. 495, 196 N.E. 377, holding that the right of a claimant to…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- State, Ex Rel. v. Indus. Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 1937
- State, Ex Rel. v. Indus. Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 1934
- Industrial Commission v. VailOhio Supreme Court · 1924
- Noggle v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1935
3Cited by10 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Cleveland Ry. Co. v. AtkinsonOhio Supreme Court · 1941
- Stough v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1944
- Clendenen v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1942
- McManus v. Industrial CommissionOhio Court of Appeals · 1940
- Sergi v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1940
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.