State ex rel. Geauga Industries, Co. v. Industrial Commission
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
The Industrial Commission has broad discretion in the performance of its duties and its actions are presumed to be in all respects valid and in the exercise of good faith and sound judgment. State, ex rel. Gerspacher, v. Coffinberry (1952), 157 Ohio St. 32. As long as there is some evidence to support the commission’s findings and no abuse of discretion is shown, the commission’s order will not be disturbed. State, ex rel. General Motors Corp., v. Indus. Comm. (1977), 50 Ohio St. 2d 155.
Relator objects to the determination made by the commission that relator violated IC-5-08.03 (A). That…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- State ex rel. M. T. D. Products, Inc. v. StebbinsOhio Supreme Court · 1975
- State ex rel. Springfield Container Corp. v. StebbinsOhio Supreme Court · 1976
- State, ex rel. General Motors Corp. v. Industrial Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 1977
3Cited by3 opinions
- State ex rel. Aspinwall v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1988
- State ex rel. King v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1988
- Jaramillo v. Anaconda Co.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1981