Employer Cases: Classification/Reclassification

(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.

Cafaro Mgt. Co., State ex rel. v. Kielmeyer (3/21/07)

BWC did not err in reclassifying clerical and security employees for purposes of determining employer's premiums.

Vote: 7-0
Opinion by: Per Curiam

Craftsmen Basement Finishing Sys., Inc., State ex rel. v. Ryan (4/15/09)

BWC must adequately explain decision to reclassify employees so that reviewing court could understand reason for reclassifying when decision to reclassify was not self-explanatory.

Vote: 7-0
Opinion by: Per Curiam

Ohio Aluminum Industries, Inc., State ex rel. v. Indus. Comm. (10/16/02)

Bureau's classification of employer's business (for premium determination) was not unreasonable and was supported by some evidence.

Vote: 7-0
Opinion by: Per Curiam

RMS of Ohio, Inc., State ex rel. v. Ohio Bur. of Workers' Comp. (4/4/07)

BWC did not err in reclassifying business for purpose of determining workers' compensation premium rates.

Vote: 7-0
Opinion by: Per Curiam

Roberds, Inc., State ex rel. v. Conrad (8/25/99)

Bureau of Workers' Compensation correctly categorized employer's employees for purposes of determining premium to be paid.

Vote: 7-0
Opinion by: Per Curiam

Employer Cases: Classification/Reclassification

(Supreme Court)

Cafaro Mgt. Co., State ex rel. v. Kielmeyer (3/21/07)

BWC did not err in reclassifying clerical and security employees for purposes of determining employer's premiums.

Vote: 7-0Opinion by: Per Curiam

Craftsmen Basement Finishing Sys., Inc., State ex rel. v. Ryan (4/15/09)

BWC must adequately explain decision to reclassify employees so that reviewing court could understand reason for reclassifying when decision to reclassify was not self-explanatory.

Vote: 7-0Opinion by: Per Curiam

Ohio Aluminum Industries, Inc., State ex rel. v. Indus. Comm. (10/16/02)

Bureau's classification of employer's business (for premium determination) was not unreasonable and was supported by some evidence.

Vote: 7-0Opinion by: Per Curiam

RMS of Ohio, Inc., State ex rel. v. Ohio Bur. of Workers' Comp. (4/4/07)

BWC did not err in reclassifying business for purpose of determining workers' compensation premium rates.

Vote: 7-0Opinion by: Per Curiam

Roberds, Inc., State ex rel. v. Conrad (8/25/99)

Bureau of Workers' Compensation correctly categorized employer's employees for purposes of determining premium to be paid.

Vote: 7-0Opinion by: Per Curiam

Injured at Work?

Vote: 7-0
Opinion by: Per Curiam

Vote: 7-0
Opinion by: Per Curiam

Vote: 7-0
Opinion by: Per Curiam

Vote: 7-0
Opinion by: Per Curiam

Vote: 7-0
Opinion by: Per Curiam