State, Ex Rel. v. Indus. Comm.
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
Relatrix maintains Section 1465-90, General Code, is applicable, and controlling of the controversy. Respondent insists such section is not applicable and that relatrix is bound by the provisions of the Public Work-Relief Compensation Act, hereinafter described.
On November 27, 1934, this court rendered a decision to the effect that a "relief worker" receiving a wage "under any appointment or contract of hire" with one of the political subdivisions of the state named in Section 1465-61, General Code, is entitled to the benefits of the Workmen's Compensation Law, when injured in the course of…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Industrial Commission v. KamrathOhio Supreme Court · 1928
- Smith v. New York Central Rd.Ohio Supreme Court · 1930
- Slatmeyer v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1926
- Cleveland Ry. Co. v. HallidayOhio Supreme Court · 1933
- Otis Elevator Co. v. Industrial CommissionIllinois Supreme Court · 1922
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by65 opinions
- Van Fossen v. Babcock & Wilcox Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1988
- State v. ConsilioOhio Supreme Court · 2007
- Bielat v. BielatOhio Supreme Court · 2000
- Kunkler v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1988
- Gregory v. FlowersOhio Supreme Court · 1972
60 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.