State ex rel. Commercial Lovelace Motor Freight, Inc. v. Lancaster

The issue before us, based upon the procedural posture of this case, is whether the commission abused its discretion in finding appellant violated a specific safety requirement.1 For the attendant reasons, we affirm the judgment below and decline to issue the requested writ.

For this court to grant a writ of mandamus with respect to a decision by the Industrial Commission, it is incumbent upon the relator to demonstrate that the commission committed an abuse of discretion. State, ex rel. Morris, v. Indus. Comm. (1984), 14 Ohio St. 3d 38. An abuse of discretion “implies not merely error of…