Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Lyburn Construction Co. v. Industrial Commission

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided July 24, 1985No. 84-797PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Per curiam

The issue presented herein is whether the court of appeals abused its discretion in denying the requested writ. We conclude that no abuse has been shown, and thus we affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.

*279Compensation for specific safety requirement violations under the workers’ compensation system is based on Section 35, Article II of the Ohio Constitution. This section states in pertinent part:

“* * * [The Industrial Commission] shall have full power and authority to hear and determine whether or not an injury, disease or death resulted because of the failure of the employer to comply…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Teece v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1981
  2. State ex rel. Haines v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1972
  3. State, Ex Rel. v. Indus. Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 1936
  4. State ex rel. Reed v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1965
  5. State ex rel. Zito v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1980

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Newman v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  2. State ex rel. Newman v. Indus. Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 1997
  3. State Ex Rel. Moore v. Industrial CommissionOhio Court of Appeals · 1985
  4. State ex rel. Grunau Fire Protection Systems, Inc. v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1992

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

Powered by the Exa API