Administrative Practice Cases: Miscellaneous

(Court of Appeals)

Click on the case name to read the decision on the Ohio Supreme Court's web site. Decisions which adopt the decision of a lower court or Magistrate, or which decide a case based on a previous decision, are excluded.

Cesa, State ex rel. v. Indus. Comm. (4/10/07)

Where Commission issued incorrect notice of hearing, proper remedy is to vacate order and require Commission to issue proper notice of the issues to be considered at the hearing and then issue a new order after holding the hearing.

Vote: 3-0
Opinion by: Judge Bryant
Appellate District: 10

DaimlerChrysler Corp., State ex rel. v. Lopez (9/6/05)

R.C. 4123.511(J), governing recoupment of overpayments, does not apply to recoupment of amounts paid in error; statutory provision only applies to overpayments created by a judicial or administrative reversal of a previous order to pay compensation.

Vote: 3-0
Opinion by: Judge Klatt
Appellate District: 10

Gen. Elec. Co., State ex rel. v. Indus. Comm. (6/28/07)

BWC/IC could reactivate claim which Industrial Commission dismissed for failure to comply with resolution setting forth requirements for asbestos claim when those requirements were satisfied; claimant is not required to file new claim.

Vote: 3-0
Opinion by: Judge French
Appellate District: 10

Navistar, State ex rel. v. Indus. Comm. (8/10/04)

Commission did not violate due process by considering temporary total denial on employer's appeal when claimant had not appealed DHO's denial of temporary total. Appeal by one party at administrative level makes the entire order subject to review.

Vote: 3-0
Opinion by: Judge Brown
Appellate District: 10

Steinbrunner, State ex rel. v. Indus. Comm. (6/30/06)

Commission had no jurisdiction to consider whether intervening injury had occurred where no notice had been provided to claimant that that issue was going to be considered at hearing; consideration of issue not included in notice of hearing violates Due Process.

Vote: 3-0
Opinion by: Judge Travis
Appellate District: 10

Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel Corp., State ex rel. v. Indus. Comm. (6/5/07)

SHO is not required to remand case to DHO for hearing on the merits when disagreeing with DHO decision to dismiss case.

Vote: 3-0
Opinion by: Judge Grey
Appellate District: 10