Legal Opinion
State, Ex Rel. v. Indus. Comm.
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided December 17, 1941No. 28622PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
The respondent claims the Court of Appeals erred in overruling its demurrer to the petition for the reason that, since the validity of the settlement contract raised a legal question, the commission had no jurisdiction to determine that issue and was, therefore, not required to grant a rehearing.
In the opinion of this court, the commission had jurisdiction to consider the contract and find that it was valid and broad enough to bar the claim until the contrary was determined. State, ex rel. Fortner, v. IndustrialCommission, 126 Ohio St. 554, 186 N.E. 396, and State, exrel. Fortner, v.…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- City of Ardmore v. OrrSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913
- Fowle v. New Haven & Northampton Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1873
- State, Ex Rel. v. Indus. Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 1932
- Kaiser v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1940
- Snyder v. State Liability Board of AwardsOhio Supreme Court · 1916
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Liddell v. SCA Services of Ohio, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1994
- Kittle v. KellerOhio Supreme Court · 1967
- Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Industrial CommissionArizona Supreme Court · 1986
- State ex rel. Johnston v. Ohio Bureau of Workers' CompensationOhio Supreme Court · 2001
- Liddell v. SCA Serv. of Ohio, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1994
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.