Ohio Workers' Compensation Decisions
(Court of Appeals)
Trial Practice: Notice of Appeal / Complaint — Timely
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.
Trial court improperly dismissed complaint in R.C. 4123.512 appeal where injured worker had initially timely filed an appeal from the Commission's decision and filed a voluntary dismissal after the employer filed a motion to dismiss for failure to timely file the complaint because the injured worker timely refiled the notice of appeal and also timely filed a complaint in the refiled action.
Opinion by: McFarland
Appellate District: 4
Workers' compensation appeal is not timely if complaint is not filed within 30 days of notice of appeal. Therefore, filing second complaint after initial complaint is dismissed requires use of savings statute, which means that third complaint cannot be filed (because savings statute can only be invoked one time).
Opinion by: Judge Ringland
Appellate District: 12
R.C. 4123.512 appeal must be filed within 60 days of receipt of Industrial Commission order. Appeal filed within 60 days of receipt of reconsideration order, but over 90 days after receipt of Commission order is not timely because appeal period is not extended by filing motion for reconsideration with Commission.
Opinion by: Judge Klatt
Appellate District: 10
60 day appeal period runs from time of second (corrected) Commission order which correctly listed date of the appeal being ruled on, rather than from time of first order which listed an incorrect appeal date.
Opinion by: Judge Tyack
Appellate District: 10
Trial court properly granted summary judgment to dismiss refiled complaint which was filed more than one year after the previous case had been dismissed.
Opinion by: Judge Donovan
Appellate District: 2
Trial court improperly granted employer's motion for default judgment based on claimant's failure to timely file complaint in employer appeal where claimant had filed motion for leave to file untimely complaint and court did not rule on that motion. Motion for leave to file must be considered because policy favors deciding cases on the merits and claimants must be given opportunity to show that the failure to timely file complaint was due to excusable neglect or good cause.
Opinion by: Judge Hoffman
Appellate District: 5
Notice to non-attorney representative is sufficient notice to representative for purposes of calculating 60 day period to file appeal because statute does not say date is calculated from receipt of notice by attorney representative.
Opinion by: Judge Moore
Appellate District: 9
Where record did not indicate what day claimant received Industrial Commission's denial of claim, Common Pleas court improperly dismissed appeal as untimely.
Opinion by: Judge Donofrio
Appellate District: 7