Legal Opinion
Industrial Commission v. Rotar
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided November 18, 1931No. 22908PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtAllen, J.
The controlling question in this case arises out of the application of the facts of the record to Section 1465-72a, General Code, which reads as follows:
“In all cases of injury or death, claims for compensation shall be forever barred, unless, within two years after the injury or death, application shall have been made to the industrial commission of Ohio or to the employer in the event such employer has elected to pay compensation direct.”
It is conceded that Mrs. Rotar’s application for compensation is barred under this section unless she can avail herself of the fact that at the time that…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Hanger v. AbbottSupreme Court of the United States · 1868
- Kahn v. AndersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
- Swiss National Insurance v. MillerSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- In re MillerCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1922
- Commercial Cable Co. v. SameDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1919
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Osbourne v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1947
- Darnall v. DaySupreme Court of Iowa · 1949
- PETERS v. McKAYOregon Supreme Court · 1951
- Salvoni v PilsonCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1950
- Leiberg, Admx. v. VitangeliOhio Court of Appeals · 1942
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.