Amputation, Loss of Use Cases: Vision, Loss of

(Supreme Court)

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.

Autozone, Inc., State ex rel. v. Indus. Comm.s (2/21/08)

Doctor's opinion that claimant is "legally blind" is evidence to support award for loss of sight in eye.

Vote: 4-3
Opinion by: Pfeifer

Baker, State ex rel. v. Coast to Coast Manpower, L.L.C. (6/9/11)

Commission did not abuse its discretion denying loss of vision award where cataract surgery corrected vision and uncorrected vision never reached threshhold of 25%; surgical removal of cornea does not require loss of vision award.

Vote: 3-3, 1 concurs separately
Opinion by: Lundberg Stratton

Gen. Elec. Corp., State ex rel. v. Indus. Comm. (11/3/04)

Worker who receives corneal lens implants remains entitled to award for total loss of vision because award for loss of vision is based on uncorrected vision.

Vote: 6-0
Opinion by: Per Curiam

La-Z-Boy Furniture Galleries, State ex rel. v. Thomas (7/13/10)

Commission did not abuse its discretion in granting loss of vision award based on pre-injury vision which had been corrected by a corneal transplant.

Vote: 7-0
Opinion by: Per Curiam