Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Burnett v. Industrial Commission

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided August 24, 1983No. 82-1254PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Per curiam

The court of appeals denied the writ for the reason that “* * * there is no evidence showing that he [Burnett] was exposed to causative factors while employed by respondent, Peck-Hannaford & Briggs Co., his last employer, as required by State, ex rel. The Hall China Co., v. *268Indus. Comm. (1962), 120 Ohio App. 374 [27 O.O.2d 304].” The court’s interpretation of Hall China was incorrect. That decision does not require a claimant to prove injurious exposure at the last place of employment. The court therein held that an injurious exposure was a prerequisite to the allowance of an occupational…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State ex rel. City of Cleveland v. CalandraOhio Supreme Court · 1980
  2. State ex rel. Benton v. Columbus & Southern Ohio Electric Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1968
  3. State ex rel. Bargahiser v. Board of ElectionsOhio Supreme Court · 1968
  4. State Ex Rel. Hall China Co. v. Industrial CommissionOhio Court of Appeals · 1962

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Green v. B.F. Goodrich Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1993
  2. Stivison v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1997
  3. Job v. Cleveland Dance CenterOhio Court of Appeals · 1989
  4. State ex rel. Ross v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  5. Bagin v. Irc Fibers Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1991

9 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