Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Campbell v. Industrial Commission

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 22, 1971No. 71-115PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHerbert, J.

Initially, the propriety of the extraordinary remedy of mandamus in this case must be considered in light of whether appellant has a plain and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law. State, ex rel. Pressley, v. Indus. Comm. (1971), 11 Ohio St. 2d 141, 228 N. E. 2d 631; State, ex rel. Harris, v. Haynes (1952), 157 Ohio St. 214, 105 N. E. 2d 53.

R. C. 4123.519 provides for appeal from “* * * a decision of the Industrial Commission in any injury case, other than a decision as to the extent of disability, to the Court of Common Pleas * *

Clear though the above quoted language may have…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Pressley v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1967
  2. Reeves v. FlowersOhio Supreme Court · 1971
  3. State ex rel. Mansour v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1969

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. State ex rel. General Motors Corp. v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1975
  2. Felty v. AT&T Technologies, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1992
  3. Zavatsky v. StringerOhio Supreme Court · 1978
  4. State ex rel. Kroger Co. v. StoverOhio Supreme Court · 1987
  5. State ex rel. Miller v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1994

19 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