Injury Cases: Res Judicata (Court of Appeals)

Ohio Workers’ Compensation Decisions
(Court of Appeals)

Injury: Res Judicata

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.

Banner v. Fresh Mark, Inc. (6/29/07)

Res judicata does not require that all diagnosed claims be filed in single motion.

Vote: 3-0
Opinion by: Judge Delaney
Appellate District: 5

Birdsong v. McDonald Corp. (7/23/03)

Where claimant had previously withdrawn ACL claim before hearing at time when evidence only indicated that ACL injury was possible, later claim for ACL was not barred by legal doctrine of res judicata.

Vote: 3-0
Opinion by: Judge Farmer
Appellate District: 5

Broyles v. Conrad (5/6/05)

Decision of Administrator to deny claim was not judicial, therefore res judicata does not apply.

Vote: 3-0
Opinion by: Judge Grady
Appellate District: 2

Chiple v. Acme Arsena Co., Inc. (9/28/06)

Res judicata bars second claim for same injury which had previously been denied by BWC.

Vote: 3-0
Opinion by: Judge Cooney
Appellate District: 8

Conner v. SBS Acquisition Corp. (10/25/04)

Res judicata did not bar later claim for aggravation of pre-existing arthritis where the parties did not have the opportunity to fully litigate a previously denied claim for osteoarthritis.

Vote: 2-1
Opinion by: Judge Valen
Appellate District: 12

Daniel v. Williams (1/28/14)

Where unknown third party filed workers’ compensation claim, and injured worker did not know claim existed or have chance to provide evidence, BWC denial does not act as res judicata against later claim filed by injured worker for same injury.

Vote: 3-0
Opinion by: Judge O’Grady

Appellate District:
10

Faierman v. Conrad (11/29/04)

Res judicata does not apply where BWC decision not to allow claim is not an adjudication; when BWC denied claim after injured worker had failed to submit medical evidence, based on claims specialist’s conversation with injured worker, decision is not an adjudication and res judicata does not bar decision in injured worker’s favor on second application.

Vote: 3-0
Opinion by: Judge Powell
Appellate District: 12

Godfrey v. Admr., Ohio Bur. of Workers’ Comp. (10/19/07)

Where BWC disallowed claim based on conflicting medical evidence was not appealed, that decision acts as res judicata to bar a later application seeking allowance of the same condition.

Vote: 3-0
Opinion by: Judge Sundermann
Appellate District: 1

Holbrook v. OhioHealth Corp. (6/11/15)

Res judicata bars second claim for an additional allowance which had previously been denied even though second claim argued that a surgery (which had occurred before the filing of the first claim), rather than the initial injury, caused the second condition.

Vote: 2-0, 1 concurs in judgment only
Opinion by: Judge Sadler
Appellate District: 10

Hornschemeier v. Buehrer (7/31/17)

Trial court properly denied injured worker’s claim for allowance of chondromalacia of left knee where worker was participating for osteoarthritis of right knee and the only medical testimony indicated that osteoarthritis and chondromalacia were the “same thing.”

Vote: 3-0
Opinion by: Judge Ringland
Appellate District: 12

Miller v. Community Health Partners (5/13/13)

Employer’s failure to appeal psychiatric injury resulting from back condition does not entitle claimant to judgment on appeal relating to underlying back injury. The final decision on the psychiatric injury does not act as res judicata because there is no evidence that the issue of whether the injured worker suffered a compensable back injury was fully litigated in the hearing on the psychiatric claim.

Vote: 3-0
Opinion by: Judge Moore
Appellate District: 9

Norman v. Longaberger Co. (3/31/04)

Res judicata bars second application for additional allowances where the treating doctor indicates that the conditions are identical and the evidence is based on the same MRI.

Vote: 3-0
Opinion by: Judge Edwards
Appellate District: 5

Powell v. Toledo Pub. Schools (4/9/10)

Decision on handicap reimbursement is unrelated to issue of allowance and therefore doctrine of collateral estoppel does not apply.

Vote: 3-0
Opinion by: Judge Osowik
Appellate District: 6

Starkey v. Builders Firstsource Ohio Valley, L.L.C. (8/24/11)

Trial court properly granted summary judgment for employer where injured worker had already been granted right to participate for injury at issue on an R.C. 4123.512.

Vote: 3-0
Opinion by: Judge Sundermann
Appellate District: 1

Todd v. Todd Heating Plumbing Bldg. Co., Inc. (10/29/10)

Res judicata applies and bars consideration of a second application for allowance of an injury where the BWC had adjudicated a previous application for an injury and that decision had not been appealed.

Vote: 3-0
Opinion by: Judge Farmer
Appellate District: 5

Witschger v. E.I. DuPont De Nemours & Co. (5/7/14)

Collateral estoppel bars workers’ compensation claim against one employer when the Industrial Commission has already granted the injured worker the right to participate for the exact same injury against a different employer.

Vote: 3-0
Opinion by: Judge Fischer
Appellate District:
1