Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Ooten v. Siegel Interior Specialists Co.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 30, 1998No. 1996-1421PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Per curiam

Wage-loss compensation was denied to claimant because the commission found insufficient evidence of actual wage loss and, alternatively, no causal relationship between the. asserted loss and industrial injury. The latter, particularly, presents a novel question of whether the commission abused its discretion in denying wage-loss compensation for lack of a job search to a self-employed claimant. Because we answer this question in the negative, we affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.

Causal relationship is often satisfied by evidence of an unsuccessful search for employment at the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Pepsi-Cola Bottling Co. v. MorseOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  2. Hanmer v. Wes Barrette MasonrySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1987
  3. Wal-Mart v. BallDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1989

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Brinkman v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  2. State ex rel. Jones v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  3. State ex rel. Timken Co. v. KovachOhio Supreme Court · 2003
  4. State ex rel. Brinkman v. Indus. Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 1999
  5. State ex rel. Yates v. Abbott Laboratories, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 2002

19 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