Trial Practice Cases: Notice of Appeal / Complaint — Substantial Compliance (Court of Appeals)

Ohio Workers’ Compensation Decisions
(Court of Appeals)

Trial Practice: Notice of Appeal / Complaint — Substantial Compliance

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.

Autozone, Inc. v. Mercer (12/2/02)

Employer’s notice of appeal to common pleas court substantially complied with requirements and provided sufficient information to understand what order employer was appealing; even though notice of appeal referenced wrong order, a copy of the correct order was attached.

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

Connelly v. Parma Community Gen. Hosp. (7/15/04)

Notice of appeal which listed proper employer, claim number and party appealing, and was served with complaint listing procedural history was valid even though it listed the wrong order because it was in substantial compliance with requirements for valid notice of appeal.

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

Hamilton v. Cuyahoga Community College (6/15/06)

Employer’s notice of appeal which referenced wrong hearing was in substantial compliance with statutory requirements because it put claimant on notice of what was being appealed.

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

Howard v. Penske Logistics, L.L.C. (8/27/08)

Attempted R.C. 4123.512 appeal which did not indicate what order was being appealed and which did not notify all parties of the attempt to appeal was not in substantial compliance and did not provide the trial court with jurisdiction over the appeal.

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

Lehman v. Buehrer (3/8/12)

Notice of appeal which contained wrong information about employer, claim number and date of injury does not substantially comply with R.C. 4123.512 requirements. Errors in notice of appeal cannot be corrected by reference to complaint.

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

Richardson v. Indus. Comm. (5/29/09)

Purported notice of appeal which failed to provide information about the worker’s compensation claim the party was attempting to appeal and which appeared to seek an investigation of events was not sufficient to substantially comply with R.C. 4123.512’s requirements for a notice of appeal from an Industrial Commission decision.

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