Continuing Jurisdiction Cases: Newly Discovered Evidence (Supreme Court)

Ohio Workers’ Compensation Decisions
(Supreme Court)

Continuing Jurisdiction: Newly Discovered Evidence

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.

Frank W. Schaefer, Inc., State ex rel. v. Indus. Comm. (12/30/98)

Where employer seeks to have Commission exercise continuing jurisdiction based on newly discovered evidence, but employer could have previously discovered the evidence if it had acted with due diligence, there is no basis for the exercise of continuing jurisdiction.

Vote: 7-0
Opinion by: Per Curiam

Knapp, State ex rel. v. Indus. Comm. (11/27/12)

Report from doctor who did not conduct new examination of injured worker or review file did not constitute “newly discovered evidence” to justify Commission exercise of continuing jurisdiction.

Vote: 6-0, 1 concurs in judgment
Opinion by: Per Curiam

US Airways, Inc., State ex rel. v. Indus. Comm. (11/8/00)

Where injured worker’s supervisor provided affidavit supporting injured worker’s VSSR claim, affidavit was “new and additional evidence” which supported Commission decision to grant rehearing. However, because Commission’s order did not understandably explain decision, Commission must issue new order containing adequate explanation.

Vote: 7-0
Opinion by: Per Curiam