Legal Opinion

Pierce v. Trimble

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided March 15, 1995No. 94-CA-21PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Fain, Judge.

Defendant-appellant, Siemens Energy & Automation, Inc., appeals from the judgment of the trial court in which the jury found that plaintiff-appellee, Brenda A. Pierce, contracted a compensable nonscheduled occupational disease, known as “overuse syndrome,” in the course of her employment with Siemens. Siemens argues that the trial court erred when it denied Siemens’s motions for directed verdict because overuse syndrome does not meet the statutory definition of a “compensable nonscheduled disease” under R.C. 4123.68 and, thus, that the judgment is contrary to law. We overrule…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Seasons Coal Co. v. City of ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 1984
  2. C. E. Morris Co. v. Foley Construction Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1978
  3. Strother v. HutchinsonOhio Supreme Court · 1981
  4. Ruta v. Breckenridge-Remy Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1982
  5. Osler v. City of LorainOhio Supreme Court · 1986

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Bishop v. Ohio Bureau of Workers' CompensationOhio Court of Appeals · 2001
  2. White v. Center Manufacturing Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1998

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API