Legal Opinion · Concurrence

State Ex Rel. Haddox v. Industrial Commission

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided March 12, 2013No. 2011-1622Published

1Concurrence

O’Connor, C J.,

concurring.

{¶ 36} I concur in the majority’s decision, because I must.

{¶ 37} As the majority opinion makes clear, the result in this case is compelled by the court’s prior decision in State ex rel. Gross v. Indus. Comm., 115 Ohio St.3d 249, 2007-Ohio-4916, 874 N.E.2d 1162 (“Gross II”).

{¶ 38} I dissented, strongly, from the majority’s decision in Gross II, asserting that this court had wrongly decided to reconsider its prior decision in the case, State ex rel. Gross v. Indus. Comm., 112 Ohio St.3d 65, 2006-Ohio-6500, 858 N.E.2d 335 (“Gross I ”), and wrongly decided to find that…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Westfield Insurance v. GalatisOhio Supreme Court · 2003
  2. Burnet v. Coronado Oil & Gas Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1932
  3. Square D Co. v. Niagara Frontier Tariff Bureau, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  4. Elek v. Huntington National BankOhio Supreme Court · 1991
  5. State ex rel. Gross v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2007

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