Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Morrow v. Industrial Commission

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 20, 1994No. 93-603PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Per curiam

Two questions are presented: (1) Does an adequate remedy at law exist? and (2) Did the commission abuse its discretion in disallowing the challenged conditions?

The first issue raised is quickly resolved. Only matters going to claimant’s right to participate or continue to participate in the workers’ compensation system are appealable under R.C. 4123.519. Afrates v. Lorain (1992), 63 Ohio *238St.3d 22, 584 N.E.2d 1175. Claimant’s right to participate in this case, however, is secondary to the question of the commission’s jurisdiction to address the compensability of the disputed conditions. This…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Afrates v. City of LorainOhio Supreme Court · 1992
  2. State ex rel. Baker Material Handling Corp. v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  3. State ex rel. Saunders v. Metal Container Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1990

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. McKenney v. Hillside Dairy Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1996
  2. State ex rel. Hinds v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  3. Banner v. Fresh Mark, 2006ca00055 (6-29-2007)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2007
  4. Hudson v. Tomkins IndustriesOhio Court of Appeals · 1997
  5. Foster v. Akro CorporationOhio Court of Appeals · 2000

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

Powered by the Exa API