Legal Opinion

Hanley v. Daimler Chrysler Corp.

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided August 13, 2004No. WD-03-084PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Lanzinger, Judge.

{¶ 1} Robert Hanley appeals the decision of the Wood County Court of Common Pleas granting summary judgment to DaimlerChrysler Corporation and the Administrator of Workers’ Compensation. Because we conclude that the trial court properly determined that compliance with Resolution R96-1-01 is a prerequisite to a worker’s right to participate in the fund, we affirm.

Background

{¶ 2} On May 29, 2002, Hanley filed a claim with the Bureau of, Workers’ Compensation (“BWC”), alleging that he had contracted asbestosis in the course of his employment with DaimlerChrysler Corporation…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Dresher v. BurtOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  2. Village of Grafton v. Ohio Edison Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1996
  3. Harless v. Willis Day Warehousing Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1978
  4. Wing v. Anchor Media, Ltd.Ohio Supreme Court · 1991
  5. State ex rel. Quarto Mining Co. v. ForemanOhio Supreme Court · 1997

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Morrison v. Horseshoe CasinoOhio Court of Appeals · 2020
  2. Gardi v. Lakewood School Dist. Bd. of Edn.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2013
  3. Esters v. Daimlerchrysler Corp., Unpublished Decision (9-1-2004)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2004
  4. Wesolowski v. Toledo Refining Co., L.L.C.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2024

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API