Legal Opinion · Dissent

State ex rel. Jeffrey v. Industrial Commission

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided August 13, 1986No. 85-1157Published

1DissentHolmes, J.

I must dissent from the majority’s opinion because I do not feel that the Industrial Commission’s order was an abuse of discretion. Granting a writ of mandamus is clearly inappropriate where the record contains some evidence in support of the commission’s findings. State, ex rel. G F Business Equip., Inc., v. Indus. Comm. (1981), 66 Ohio St. 2d 446, 447 [20 O.O.3d 379], citing State, ex rel. Humble, v. Mark Concepts, Inc. (1979), 60 Ohio St. 2d 77 [14 O.O.3d 275]; State, ex rel. Davis, v. Indus. Comm. (1979), 60 Ohio St. 2d 160 [14 O.O.3d 402]; State, ex rel. Republic Steel, v. Indus. Comm.…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Teece v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1981
  2. State ex rel. Mitchell v. Robbins & Myers, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1983
  3. State ex rel. Haines v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1972
  4. State ex rel. G F Business Equipment, Inc. v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1981
  5. State ex rel. Humble v. Mark Concepts, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1979

11 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