State ex rel. Shields v. Industrial Commission
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
Claimant supplied the commission with two doctors’ reports. Serious flaws in both reports, however, dictate their removal from evidentiary consideration. Both Drs. Chrisman and Pabst rely heavily on nonallowed medical conditions. Pabst farther factors in nonmedical data. State ex rel. Waddle v. Indus. Comm. (1993), 67 Ohio St.3d 452, 619 N.E.2d 1018, and State ex rel. Lopez v. Indus. Comm. (1994), 69 Ohio St.3d 445, 633 N.E.2d 528, compel the removal of these reports from consideration.
Removal of the Chrisman and Pabst reports leaves only the Vetter and Reynolds reports, on which the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- State ex rel. Waddle v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1993
- State ex rel. Lopez v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1994
- State ex rel. Fultz v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1994
- State ex rel. Ellis v. McGraw Edison Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1993
- State ex rel. Hart v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1993
3Cited by19 opinions
- State ex rel. Yancey v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1997
- State ex rel. Digiacinto v. Indus. Comm. (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2020
- State ex rel. Paraskevopoulos v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1998
- State ex rel. Stevens v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2015
- State ex rel. Staton v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2001
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.