Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Lantz v. Industrial Commission

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided February 24, 1993No. 92-1418PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

Claimant contends that the appellate court erred in dismissing his complaint. He also claims that due process was violated by the appellate court. We disagree with both assertions and affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.

Claimant’s due-process argument is apparently twofold — that he was denied the opportunity to seek summary judgment and that the appellate court erroneously disposed of the case on Civ.R. 12(B)(6) grounds. Both acts, claimant urges, deprived him of notice and an opportunity to be heard. This argument lacks merit.

Claimant initially contends that the denial of his leave…

2Cited by3 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Foster v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  2. State ex rel. Foster v. Indus. Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 1999
  3. Simindinger v. MeekerOhio Court of Appeals · 2021

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

Powered by the Exa API