Legal Opinion

State ex rel. DeMint v. Industrial Commission

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided February 14, 1990No. 88-1658PublishedCited by 41 opinions

1Per curiam

State, ex rel. Mitchell, v. Robbins & Myers, Inc., supra, requires that:

“* * * [District hearing officers, as well as regional boards of review *20and the Industrial Commission, must specifically state which evidence and only that evidence which has been relied upon to reach their conclusion, and a brief explanation stating why the claimant is or is not entitled to the benefits requested.” Id. at 483-484, 6 OBR at 534, 453 N.E. 2d at 724.

Mitchell’s purpose, as stated in State, ex rel. Jeffrey, v. Indus. Comm. (1986), 26 Ohio St. 3d 3, 5,26 OBR 3, 4, 496 N.E. 2d 919, 921, is to ensure that:

“(1)…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Frigidaire Division v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1988
  2. State ex rel. Ingold v. Ormet Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1988
  3. State ex rel. Jeffrey v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1986

3Cited by41 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Lovell v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  2. State ex rel. Pavis v. General Motors Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1992
  3. State ex rel. Bell v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  4. State ex rel. Buttolph v. General Motors Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1997
  5. State ex rel. Peabody Coal Co. v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1993

36 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