Legal Opinion

White v. Mayfield

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided May 18, 1988No. 87-326PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSweeney, J.

In the cause sub judice we are asked to interpret the pertinent language of R.C. 4123.85 as it *12applies to the facts developed below. R.C. 4123.85, which establishes the time period for the filing of claims alleging a disability due to an occupational disease, provides as follows:

“In all cases of occupational disease, or death resulting from occupational disease, claims for compensation or benefits shall be forever barred unless, within two years after the disability due to the disease began, or within such longer period as does not exceed six months after diagnosis of the occupational disease…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Hammond v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1980
  2. State ex rel. Preston v. Peabody Coal Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1984
  3. Craddock v. Eagle Picher Industries, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1982

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Jacobs v. Teledyne, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1988
  2. Dombelek v. Ohio Bureau of Workers' CompensationOhio Court of Appeals · 2003
  3. Tharp v. WhirlpoolOhio Court of Appeals · 2018
  4. State ex rel. Price v. Cent. Serv., Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 2002
  5. Chieffo v. Ysd Industries, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2004

13 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