Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Milburn v. Industrial Commission

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided August 20, 1986No. 85-1623PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Per curiam

The law of Ohio is settled that the determination of disputed facts is particularly, and finally, within the jurisdiction of the Industrial Commission. See, e.g., State, ex rel. Hudson, v. Indus. Comm. (1984), 12 Ohio St. 3d 169; State, ex rel. Kokocinski, v. Indus. Comm. (1984), 11 Ohio St. 3d 186; State, ex rel. Allerton, v. Indus. Comm. (1982), 69 Ohio St. 2d 396 [23 O.O.3d 358]; and State, ex rel. Haines, v. Indus. Comm. (1972), 29 Ohio St. 2d 15 [58 O.O.2d 70].

*121Our well-settled standard of review is that the commission will be fully-upheld where its determination is found to be supported…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Ramirez v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1982
  2. State ex rel. Haines v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1972
  3. State v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1982
  4. State ex rel. G F Business Equipment, Inc. v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1981
  5. State ex rel. Humble v. Mark Concepts, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1979

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Noll v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1991
  2. State ex rel. Burley v. Coil Packing, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1987
  3. State ex rel. Rouch v. Eagle Tool & Machine Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1986
  4. State ex rel. Kroger Co. v. StoverOhio Supreme Court · 1987
  5. State ex rel. Frigidaire Division v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1988

9 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