State ex rel. Robinson v. Indus. Comm.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as State ex rel. Robinson v. Indus. Comm., 97 Ohio St.3d 423, 2002-Ohio-6648.] THE STATE EX REL. ROBINSON, APPELLANT, v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF OHIO ET AL., APPELLEES. [Cite as State ex rel. Robinson v. Indus. Comm., 97 Ohio St.3d 423, 2002-Ohio6648.] Workers compensation Claimant awarded permanent total disability compensation by Industrial Commission Claimant s subsequent motion for scheduled loss compensation under R.C. 4123.57(B) denied by commission Mandamus sought to compel Industrial Commission to vacate its order denying compensation and to issue an order on the merits Writ denied by court of appeals Court of appeals judgment reversed State ex rel. Benton v. Columbus & S. Ohio Elec. Co. overruled and writ of mandamus granted ordering commission to grant claimant s application for scheduled loss benefits. (No. 2001-2199 Submitted September 17, 2002 Decided December 13, 2002.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, No. 01AP-13. __________________ Per Curiam. {¶1} Appellant-claimant, Eugene B. Robinson, industrially injured his back and legs in 1969 while working for Chrysler Corporation, n.k.a. DaimlerChrysler Corporation. In 1999, he was awarded permanent total disability compensation ( PTD ) effective December 31, 1997. He subsequently moved for scheduled loss compensation under R.C. 4123.57(B) for the loss of use of his legs. {¶2} Appellee Industrial Commission of Ohio denied the motion. It found that because claimant s diminished use of his legs had factored into his SUPREME COURT OF OHIO award of PTD, claimant was seeking additional compensation for the same condition, which was prohibited to claimants hurt before 1973. See State ex rel. Benton v. Columbus & S. Ohio Elec. Co. (1968), 14 Ohio St.2d 130, 43 O.O.2d 238, 237 N.E.2d 134. Claimant then turned to the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, requesting a writ of mandamus ordering the commission to vacate its order denying compensation and to issue an order on the merits. The court commented that reconciling previous Supreme Court cases on the issue was difficult and that without clearer guidance from our State Supreme Court, it was compelled to uphold the commission s order. The requested writ was thus denied and claimant now appeals to this court as of right. {¶3} On authority of State ex rel. Miller v. Indus. Comm., 97 Ohio St.3d 418, 2002-Ohio-6664, 780 N.E.2d 268, the judgment of the court of appeals is reversed, and a writ of mandamus is issued ordering the commission to vacate its order denying compensation and to issue an order on the merits. Judgment reversed and writ allowed. MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur. __________________ Ben Sheerer, for appellant. Buckingham, Doolittle & Burroughs, L.L.P., George H. Rosin and Ashley M. Stouffer, for appellee DaimlerChrysler Corporation. Betty D. Montgomery, Attorney General, and Dennis L. Hufstader, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee Industrial Commission. __________________ 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
