Legal Opinion

Marbury v. Industrial Commission

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided May 10, 1989No. 11319PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Fain, Judge.

Plaintiff-appellant, Anita Marbury, appeals from a summary judgment holding that, as a matter of law, she is not entitled to workers’ compensation benefits because the injury for which she seeks compensation was not received in the course of her employment. We agree with the trial court that, even when the evidence is viewed in a light most favorable to Marbury, summary judgment was properly entered against her. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court will be affirmed.

I

At the time of her injury, Marbury was the Assistant Director of Student Records and Registration for…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Lord v. DaughertyOhio Supreme Court · 1981
  2. Perry v. American Bakeries CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
  3. Kohlmayer v. KellerOhio Supreme Court · 1970
  4. Hardware Mutual Casualty Co. v. McDonaldCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1973

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Buczynski v. Industrial Commission of UtahCourt of Appeals of Utah · 1997
  2. Griffith v. Miamisburg, 08ap-557 (12-16-2008)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2008
  3. Lippolt v. Hague, 08ap-140 (9-30-2008)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2008
  4. Osten v. Bureau of Workers' Comp.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2017
  5. Kerr v. OhioHealth Corp.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2022

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

Powered by the Exa API