Liberty Mutual Insurance v. Industrial Commission
Ohio Supreme Court
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
- Hummel v. HummelOhio Supreme Court · 1938
- LaDEW v. LaBordeMississippi Supreme Court · 1953
- Stan-Clean of Lexington, Inc. v. Stanley Steemer International, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1981
- State ex rel. Louisiana-Pacific Corp. v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1978
3Cited by35 opinions
- 4934, Inc. v. District of Columbia Department of Employment ServicesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1992
- Stephen Cook v. Ohio Nat'l Life Ins.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2020
- In Re Whirlpool Corp. Front-Loading Washer Products Liability LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2009
- Dailey v. Craigmyle & Son Farms, L.L.C.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2008
- Dixon v. SmithOhio Court of Appeals · 1997
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.