Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Bouchonville v. Industrial Commission

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided April 6, 1988No. 86-1411PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Per curiam

Under the provisions of former R.C. 4123.57, the commission must first determine the percentage of a claimant’s permanent partial disability. Thereafter, the claimant is authorized to elect whether to receive benefits under division (A) or (B) of the section, and compensation is determined by formulas set forth in those respective divisions. A determination of the percentage of permanent partial disability — the degree of a claimant’s inability to work — is a predicate to an election under R.C. 4123.57(A) or (B), and the calculations called for by those elections. State, ex rel. Perkins, v.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Stephenson v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1987
  2. Industrial Commission v. RoyerOhio Supreme Court · 1930
  3. State ex rel. Hammond v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1980
  4. State Ex Rel. Stanek v. Industrial Commission of OhioOhio Court of Appeals · 1982

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Johnson v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1988
  2. State ex rel. Combs v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1992
  3. State ex rel. Holman v. Longfellow RestaurantOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  4. State ex rel. Arias v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1990
  5. State ex rel. Bittinger v. NACCO Mining Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1990

6 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