Legal Opinion
State v. Industrial Commission of Ohio.
Ohio Court of Appeals
Decided November 30, 1931PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ROSS, PJ.
The demurrer to the amended petition was based solely upon the ground that the court had no jurisdiction of the subject-matter ' of the action.
Taking the allegations of the amended petition as alleging an award, this claim would survive to the executrix. Bozelli v Industrial Commission, 122 Oh St 201, 171 N. E. 108.
The sole question therefore presented is: Has the court • of common pleas jurisdiction to mandamus the Industrial Commission to execute an award theretofore made?
It is held in Bozelli v Industrial Commission, supra, paragraph 1 the syllabus: “The rights of employees and…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Industrial Commission v. KamrathOhio Supreme Court · 1928
- State, Ex Rel. v. Indus. Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 1929
- Bozzelli v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1930
- State Ex Rel. Hile v. ZangerleOhio Supreme Court · 1926
- State Ex Rel. Thompson v. Indust CommOhio Supreme Court · 1929
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- McClees v. Grand International Brotherhood of Locomotive EngineersOhio Court of Appeals · 1938
- State Ex Rel. Nichols v. GregoryOhio Supreme Court · 1935
- State ex rel. Griffin v. State Industrial Accident CommissionOregon Supreme Court · 1934
- State ex rel. Hatfield v. Industrial CommissionOhio Court of Appeals · 1960
- Felmet v. BarbreSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1940
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.