Stewart Jaffy &: Assoc. Co., LPA, Attorneys at Law
A Legal Professional Association
306 E. Gay Street, Columbus, OH  43315  
Tel: 614/228-6148

Stewart Jaffy & Assoc Home Page Site Index About Stewart Jaffy & Associates Ohio Workers' Compensation Information Ohio AFL-CIO Workers' Compensation Manual Social Security Disability Links
Posted: May, 1998 Please read our legal notice.
Search
Stewart Jaffy & Assoc.
Firm Information
Our Lawyers
Directions
Ohio Workers' Compensation
Ohio Workers' Compensation Guide/FAQ
Rate Information
(1987 to present)
Current News
News Archives
(1996 to present)
Recent Ohio Supreme Court Decisions
Ohio Workers' Compensation Decision Summaries
(1998 to present)
Site Index
XML/RSS
The following information is provided courtesy of the Ohio Workers' Compensation Bulletin. For information about the Bulletin click here.

Industrial Commission Adopts Reconsideration Resolution 98-1-03.

Resolution 98-1-03

On May 6, 1998, the Industrial Commission adopted Resolution 98- 1-3. This Resolution alters the Commission's guidelines for determination of reconsideration requests and will apply to all final orders published on or after June 1, 1998.

The Commission issued this resolution after the Supreme Court's decision in the Nicholls case that the Commission's reconsideration authority was not unlimited.

The new Resolution provides that a reconsideration request must be filed within 14 days of the receipt of the order being challenged (reconsideration may only be sought from certain orders). A copy of the request for reconsideration must be sent to the opposing party and its representative. The opposing party may respond within 14 days of receipt of the request for reconsideration.

The Resolution also requires that the request for reconsideration be accompanied by (1) recitation of the grounds for reconsideartion; (2) copies of relevant orders; and (3) copies of relevant documents and proof.

The Resolution provides that reconsideration will only be granted where

  1. There are "new and changed circumstances", which occurred after the date of the order being challenged. One example given is "newly discovered evidence which by due diligence could not have been discovered" before the order;

  2. There is evidence of fraud;

  3. There is a "clear mistake of fact" in the order;

  4. There is a "clear mistake of law" in the order; or

  5. There is an error in the order which renders the order defective.

To read Resolution R98-1-03 on the Commission's web site, click here.

 


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

.