Fraud 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.
Employer cannot bring suit for fraud against claimant in
common pleas court where Commission refused to make finding of fraud.
Vote: 3-0
Opinion by:
Judge Cupp
Appellate District: 3
Absent
evidence that injured worker had received money for activities, or
engaged in activities inconsistent with his medical restrictions, there
was no basis for finding that injured worker had engaged in fraud by
receiving temporary total.
Vote:
3-0
Opinion by: Judge
Bryant
Appellate District: 10
Injured
worker did not commit fraud when he received temporary total even
though he worked for 33 hours after applying for temporary total while
waiting for bureacracy to process his request.
Vote: 2-1
Opinion by: Judge
Tyack
Appellate District: 10
Evidence
did not support Commission finding of fraud in receipt of temporary
total compensation. Finding of fraud must be based on
evidence,
not speculation and also requires evidence of intent to
defraud.
Vote:
3-0
Opinion by:
Judge Bryant
Appellate District: 10
Evidence supported
finding that claimant who was paid for driving membuers of the Amish
community multiple times a week was engaged in sustained remunerative
employment and therefore committed fraud by doing so while receiving
permanent total compensation.
Vote:
3-0
Opinion by: Judge Brown
Appellate District: 10
Commission improperly found fraud when the evidence did not establish
that claimant knew what activities constituted "work" for purposes of
temporary total compensation.
Vote:
2-0, 1 concurs in part and dissents in part
Opinion by: Judge Brown
Appellate District: 10
Commission finding of fraud cannot be appealed pursuant to
R.C. 4123.512.
Vote:
2-1
Opinion by: Judge
Kline
Appellate District: 4
Evidence
of claimant's work activities while receiving temporary total and
statements regarding her work activities and earnings which were
inconsistent with her actual activities and earnings were sufficient to
support Commission's finding of fraud.
Vote: 3-0
Opinion by: Judge French
Appellate District: 10
A
Mary Kay consultant did not engage in fraud based on sales
activities primarily conducted by others during the period she received
temporary total and wage loss compensation.
Vote: 3-0
Opinion by:
Judge Bryant
Appellate District: 10
Injured at Work?
Stewart Jaffy &
Associates can help you receive the workers’ compensation
benefits you
are entitled to. We are based in Columbus and represent
injured
workers throughout Ohio before the BWC, Industrial Commission
and
in court.
We also represent people who have social security
disability claims or who have a disability claim before another state
administrative agency (PERS, STRS, SERS or police and fire fighters
disability).
Initial consultations with potential clients are
free. If you are interested in talking with us about a
potential
case, call us at (614) 228-6148.
Stewart Jaffy &
Associates Co.,
LPA | Attorneys at Law
306 E. Gay St. | Columbus, OH 43215
Telephone: (614) 228-6148 | Fax: (614) 228-6140
http://www.jaffylaw.com
Please read our
legal
notice.
