Legal Opinion

State ex rel. R. Bauer & Sons Roofing & Siding, Inc. v. Industrial Commission

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 2, 1998No. 95-2633PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Per curiam

Three questions are presented for our review: (1) Did the commission abuse its discretion in allowing the amendment of McClellan’s VSSR application to allege a violation of Ohio Adm.Code 4121:1 — 3—03(J)(1), the safety-belt/lifeline requirement? (2) Did the commission abuse its discretion in finding that Ohio Adm.Code 4121:1 — 3—09(F)(1), the catch-platform requirement, applies to gutter repair? and (3) Did the commission abuse its discretion in granting rehearing based on McClellan’s affidavit? For the following reasons, we hold that the commission properly allowed McClellan’s amendment and…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Brilliant Electric Sign Co. v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1979
  2. Kaiser v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1940
  3. State ex rel. Lovell v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  4. State, Ex Rel. v. Ind. Com.Ohio Supreme Court · 1948
  5. State ex rel. Kirby v. S.G. Loewendick & Sons, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1992

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Byington Builders, Ltd. v. Indus. Comm. (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2018
  2. State ex rel. Parks v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  3. State v. MarkinOhio Court of Appeals · 2002
  4. State ex rel. Johnson v. Hilltop Basic Resources, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 2002
  5. State ex rel. R. Bauer & Sons Roofing & Siding, Inc. v. Indus. Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 1999

7 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