Legal Opinion

Caruso v. Aluminum Co. of America

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 31, 1984No. 84-13PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSweeney, J.

The only issue properly before this court is whether R.C. 4123.68(Y) is unconstitutional as it applies to a claimant seeking compensation for a silicosis-related death that occurred prior to January 1, 1976 but more than eight years after the decedent’s work-related exposure to substances known to cause silicosis. We decide this issue with reference to R.C. 4123.68(Y) as it read at the time that plaintiff filed her claim in 1976.3

It is clear that the effect of R.C. 4123.68(Y), as applied to the plaintiff herein, is to preclude compensation for any silicosis-related death occurring more than…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Kinney v. Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1975
  2. State ex rel. Nyitray v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1983
  3. State, Ex Rel. v. Indus. Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 1941
  4. State, Ex Rel. v. Ind. Com.Ohio Supreme Court · 1950

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Lewis v. Diamond Foundry Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1987
  2. McCrone v. Bank One Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 2005
  3. Jacobs v. Teledyne, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1988
  4. State ex rel. Liposchak v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  5. Schirmer v. Homestake Mining Co.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1994

8 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