State, Ex Rel. v. Indus. Comm.
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
This is an original action in mandamus wherein the relator, James Kildow, prays this court to order the Industrial Commission of Ohio to perform its legal duty.
What is the legal duty of the Industrial Commission, under the facts in this case and the law applied thereto?
There is no dispute as to the facts. They are agreed. Hence we have a pure question of law.
Kildow was accidentally injured in the course of his employment, while working for an insured employer. He made claim to the Industrial Commission of Ohio for compensation. The Industrial Commission found his case to be compensable. In…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Norwegian Nitrogen Products Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
- State Ex Rel. Automobile MacHine Co. v. BrownOhio Supreme Court · 1929
3Cited by39 opinions
- Doyle v. Ohio Bureau of Motor VehiclesOhio Supreme Court · 1990
- Kroger Grocery & Baking Co. v. GranderOhio Supreme Court · 1948
- Zangerle v. EvattOhio Supreme Court · 1942
- Besl Corp. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1976
- Neil House Hotel Co. v. City of ColumbusOhio Supreme Court · 1944
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.