Legal Opinion

Liberty Mutual Insurance v. Industrial Commission

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 21, 1988No. 87-1937PublishedCited by 35 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWright, J.

The sole issue presented is whether appellee is entitled to reimbursement from appellant. Because we believe appellee has established a right to reimbursement under a theory of unjust enrichment, we affirm the court of appeals.

In Liberty Mutual I, we held that appellee was not entitled to a writ of mandamus because an adequate remedy at law was available through an action in the Court of Claims. However, we also considered the other two prerequisites to entitlement to a writ of mandamus: whether appellee had a clear legal right to reimbursement and whether appellant had a clear legal duty to…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Hummel v. HummelOhio Supreme Court · 1938
  2. LaDEW v. LaBordeMississippi Supreme Court · 1953
  3. Stan-Clean of Lexington, Inc. v. Stanley Steemer International, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1981
  4. State ex rel. Louisiana-Pacific Corp. v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1978

3Cited by35 opinions

  1. 4934, Inc. v. District of Columbia Department of Employment ServicesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1992
  2. Stephen Cook v. Ohio Nat'l Life Ins.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2020
  3. In Re Whirlpool Corp. Front-Loading Washer Products Liability LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2009
  4. Dailey v. Craigmyle & Son Farms, L.L.C.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2008
  5. Dixon v. SmithOhio Court of Appeals · 1997

30 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