Legal Opinion · Dissent

Fogaras v. Univ. Hospitals of Cleveland

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided September 4, 1998No. Nos. 72617 and 72618Published

1DissentNahra, Presiding Judge

I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion because the facts of this case do not support a finding that appellee was within the “zone of employment” and, even if she was, she is not automatically entitled to participate in the workers’ compensation system.

The majority finds that appellee, who was off her employer’s premises when injured, is entitled to participate in the workers’ compensation system merely because she was within the zone of employment. This assertion is unsupported by law. In Bralley v. Daugherty (1980), 61 Ohio St.2d 302, 303, 15 O.O.3d 359, 360, 401 N.E.2d 448, 450,…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Bralley v. DaughertyOhio Supreme Court · 1980
  2. Littlefield v. Pillsbury Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1983
  3. Industrial Commission v. HenryOhio Supreme Court · 1932
  4. Frishkorn v. FlowersOhio Court of Appeals · 1971
  5. Sloss v. Case Western Reserve UniversityOhio Court of Appeals · 1985

1 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