Legal Opinion · Dissent

State Ex Rel. Smith v. Industrial Commission

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided February 18, 2014No. 2012-0734Published

1DissentLanzinger, J.

{¶ 20} I respectfully dissent and would hold that the Industrial Commission should have considered the medical opinions in Smith’s case. I would therefore affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.

{¶ 21} An injured worker may qualify for a number of different benefits under Ohio’s workers’ compensation statutes. The Industrial Commission awarded permanent-total-disability benefits to George Smith in 1998 due to his persistent vegetative state that resulted from his work-related injury. This benefit, pursuant to R.C. 4123.58, is designed to compensate for the loss of earning capacity for…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State ex rel. AutoZone, Inc. v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2008
  2. State ex rel. Kincaid v. Allen Refractories Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 2007
  3. State ex rel. Sheller-Globe Corp. v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1981
  4. State ex rel. Nestlé USA-Prepared Foods Division, Inc. v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2004

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

Powered by the Exa API