Legal Opinion

State, Ex Rel. v. Indus. Comm.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 14, 1932No. 28722PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

This proceeding invokes the original jurisdiction of this court in mandamus. The relator, Clarence Schindler, was injured while employed at the plant of the Sugarcreek Clay Products Company. The injury was to his eye, resulting from a chip of glaze from the bricks he was handling flying into his right eye, shortly thereafter resulting in entire loss of vision in his right eye. Compensation having been denied by the Industrial Commission, claimant appealed to the court of common pleas of Tuscarawas county. The verdict of the jury in that court found that claimant was entitled to participate in…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State, Ex Rel. v. Indus. Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 1929
  2. Milwaukee Mechanics' Ins. v. HeffernanOhio Supreme Court · 1929

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. State, Ex Rel. v. Ind. Com.Ohio Supreme Court · 1946
  2. State, Ex Rel. v. Indus. Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 1939
  3. Royal Canning Corporation v. Industrial CommissionUtah Supreme Court · 1942
  4. State, Ex Rel. v. Indus. Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 1938
  5. Brecount v. Procter & Gamble Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1957

3 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