Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Fultz v. Industrial Commission

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided May 18, 1994No. 93-1376PublishedCited by 54 opinions

1Per curiam

This controversy centers on a Noll sufficiency review and, if the order is found lacking, the relief deemed appropriate. Upon review, we find a Noll consideration to be premature, but for the reasons set forth below, we nonetheless affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.

Neither the commission’s rehabilitation report nor Riccio’s vocational report is listed in the commission’s order as being among the evidence the commission considered. While the commission correctly contends in essence that it need only enumerate the evidence relied on, the fact that the commission in listing the…

2Cited by54 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Lovell v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  2. State ex rel. Shields v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  3. State ex rel. Ranomer v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  4. State ex rel. Buttolph v. General Motors Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1997
  5. State ex rel. Lovell v. Indus. Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 1996

49 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