State ex rel. Wireman v. Industrial Commission
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
The average weekly wage is designed to “find a fair basis for award for the loss of future compensation.” Riley v. Indus. Comm. (1983), 9 Ohio App. 3d 71, 73, 9 OBR 90, 92, 458 N.E. 2d 428, 430. In calculating this figure, two considerations dominate. First, the AWW must do substantial justice to the claimant. Second, it should not provide a windfall. State, ex rel. Erhard, v. Indus. Comm. (Sept. 27, 1988), Franklin App. No. 87 AP-1013, unreported; State, ex rel. Rutledge, v. S&H Painting Co. (Aug. 26, 1986), Franklin App. No. 85AP-559, unreported.
The period at issue is April 17, 1983 through…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Riley v. Industrial CommissionOhio Court of Appeals · 1983
- Smith v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1986
3Cited by49 opinions
- State ex rel. Clark v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1994
- State ex rel. Andersons v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1992
- State ex rel. Cawthorn v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1997
- State ex rel. Russell v. Indus. Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 1998
- State ex rel. Toth v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1997
44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.