Legal Opinion

Lewis v. Trimble

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided July 23, 1997No. 95-2427PublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtAlice Robie Resnick, J.

This appeal raises two important issues under Ohio’s workers’ compensation law. The first issue involves the application and requirements of R.C. 4123.84 with regard to “flow-through” or residual medical conditions. The second issue is whether a self-insured employer who accepts a “flow-through” or residual condition as allowed, after the two-year limitations period set forth in R.C. 4123.84 has run, has conclusively granted that condition as part of the claim.

I

R.C. 1128.81 and Residual Conditions

R.C. 4123.841 provides:

*234“(A) In all cases of injury or death, claims for compensation or benefits…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Mauzy v. Kelly Services, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1996
  2. State ex rel. Quarto Mining Co. v. ForemanOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  3. Gregory v. FlowersOhio Supreme Court · 1972
  4. Estates of Morgan v. Fairfield Family Counseling CenterOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  5. Industrial Commission v. KamrathOhio Supreme Court · 1928

22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Tubbs Jones v. SusterOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  2. State ex rel. Liposchak v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2000
  3. State ex rel. Tubbs Jones v. SusterOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  4. Stafford v. Columbus Bonding CenterOhio Court of Appeals · 2008
  5. Starkey v. Builders FirstSource Ohio Valley, L.L.C.Ohio Supreme Court · 2011

22 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