Temporary Total Cases: Work Activities (Supreme Court)

Ohio Workers’ Compensation Decisions
(Supreme Court)

Temporary Total: Work Activities

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.

Am. Stan., Inc., State ex rel. v. Boehler (5/16/03)

Injured worker’s actions as owner of rental property did not bar him from receipt of temporary total. When doctor indicated on C-84 that the condition was not MMI, evidence supported award of temporary total.

Vote: 7-0
Opinion by: Per Curiam

Ford Motor Co., State ex rel. v. Indus. Comm. (12/20/02)

Minimal activities (signing checks for employees) relating to business owned by injured worker which only secondarily produced income do not bar temporary total.

Vote: 7-0
Opinion by: Per Curiam

Honda of Am. Mfg. Co., State ex rel. v. Indus. Comm. (3/21/07)

Worker who owned store was entitled to temporary total where she engaged in minimal, non-income producing activities at store; fact that she bought the store after suffering disability is irrelevant.

Vote: 7-0
Opinion by: Per Curiam

Rollins, State ex rel. v. Indus. Comm. (5/4/05)

Claimant who received money for acting as pastor of church was working and therefore not eligible for temporary total.

Vote: 5-2
Opinion by: Justice Lundberg Stratton

Sherry, State ex rel. v. Indus. Comm. (2/8/06)

Claimant who receives money for labor is not entitled to temporary total compensation, regardless of whether he shows a profit for his labor.

Vote: 7-0
Opinion by: Per Curiam