Permanent Partial and Permanent Total Cannot Be Received for Same Time

State, ex rel. Hoskins v. Indus. Comm. (1/26/00), 87 Ohio St.3d 560:

SITUATION: Hoskins was awarded permanent partial on August 21, 1990. He was paid the percentage of permanent partial for the dates of November 11, 1988 to May 24, 1990.

In 1993 he was granted permanent total, which was back-dated to December 2, 1988. The order deducted the permanent partial paid from December 2, 1988 through May 29, 1990. Hoskins filed a mandamus, alleging abuse of discretion in deducting permanent partial from the permanent total award. Court of Appeals denied writ.

STATUS: Supreme Court affirms (5-2). Court states that the same conditions cannot simultaneously be partially disabling and totally disabling.

Court says that it is not appropriate for Hoskins to receive permanent total compensation and permanent partial compensation for the same conditions at the same time. Hoskins argued that permanent partial is a damage award and that contemporaneous payment is not "double recovery." Court says that R.C. 4123.57(D) demonstrates that the "special character" of permanent partial does not immunize it from offset from other types of compensation.

Click on the case name to view the  decision on the Supreme Court's web site.