Amputation, Loss of Use Cases: Miscellaneous (Court of Appeals)

Ohio Workers’ Compensation Decisions
(Court of Appeals)

Amputation, Loss of Use: Miscellaneous

Select the case name to read the decision on the Ohio Supreme Court’s web site. For other issues, see our topic index to Ohio workers’ compensation decisions.

A.J. Rose Mfg. Co., State ex rel. v. Indus. Comm. (9/25/12)

Industrial Commission cannot order self-insured employer to pay remaining amount of ongoing R.C. 4123.57(B) amputation/loss of use award in a lump sum based on new administrative code provision which took effect while the self-insured employer was making bi-weekly payments.

Vote: 3-0
Opinion by: Judge Klatt
Appellate District: 10

Arberia, L.L.C., State ex rel. v. Indus. Comm. (12/4/14)

When injured worker suffered loss of use of limbs several hours before death due to injury, Commission properly granted entire loss of use award to dependents because R.C. 4213.60 does not limit amount of award to period of time when worker was alive.

Vote: 2-0, 1 concurs separately
Opinion by: Judge Tyack
Appellate District:
 10

Green Tokai Co., Ltd., State ex rel. v. Indus. Comm. (9/13/07)

For loss of use of phalange, standard that loss “near the joint” constitutes loss of phalange gives Commission discretion to determine whether amputation occurred “near” the joint.

Vote: 3-0
Opinion by: Judge Petree
Appellate District: 10

Kljun v. Morrison (5/12/16)

Legislative amendment contained in budget bill which change method of payment for R.C. 4123.57(B) amputation/loss of use award violated the Ohio Constitution’s one-subject rule because there is no relationship between the state’s budget and the payment of the award (which is paid either directly by self-insurers or from the state fund created by employer premium payments, rather than from the state’s budget).

Vote: 2-1
Opinion by: Judge Kilbane
Appellate District:
 8

Mast, State, ex rel. v. Indus. Comm. (6/14/11)

Worker who was awarded compensation for loss of use of hand based on loss of two or more fingers after having two fingers and thumb amputated is entitled to additional amputation award for loss of left toe which was surgically amputated for transplant to replace left thumb.

Vote: 3-0
Opinion by: Judge Klatt
Appellate District: 10

Morgan, State ex rel. v. Superior Fibers, Inc. (9/5/02)

Claimant who lost fingers was not entitled to increased award for loss of hand where there was no evidence that claimant suffered greater disability than other workers as a result of loss of fingers.

Vote: 3-0
Opinion by: Judge Deshler
Appellate District: 10

Parzych, State ex rel. v. Indus. Comm. (6/16/09)

Payment of R.C. 4123.57(B) amputation award may be stayed pending determination of appeal over whether workers’ compensation claim should be allowed.

Vote: 3-0
Opinion by: Judge Sadler
Appellate District: 10

Weyerhaeuser Co., State ex rel. v. Indus. Comm. (8/23/11)

Facial disfigurement award requires disfigurement which either impairs or may impair opportunities for employment, but does not require proof of current desire to work.

Vote: 3-0
Opinion by: Judge Sadler
Appellate District: 10

Woodhull, State ex rel. v. Indus. Comm. (9/27/11)

Doctor’s report applying improper standard did not support denial of award.

Vote: 3-0
Opinion by: Judge French
Appellate District: 10