1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. Ohio
  4. 11 Ohio
  5. 11 Ohio St. 3d 186 (1984)
 

STATE EX REL. KOKOCINSKI v. INDUS. COMM.

No. 83-1476.

11 Ohio St. 3d 186 (1984)

THE STATE, EX REL. KOKOCINSKI, v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF OHIO ET AL.

Supreme Court of Ohio.

Decided June 20, 1984.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Messrs. Wagoner, Steinberg, Chinnis & Dorf and Mr. Michael D. Dorf, for relator.

Mr. Anthony J. Celebrezze, Jr., attorney general, Mr. Lee M. Smith and Mr. Richard C. Slavin, for respondent Industrial Commission.

Messrs. Spengler, Nathanson, Heyman, McCarthy & Durfee, Mr. James P. Triona and Mr. James M. Sciarini, for respondent Toledo Building Services Co.

Per Curiam.

It is well-settled that "the determination of disputed factual situations is within the final jurisdiction of the Industrial Commission, and subject to correction by action in mandamus only upon a showing of abuse of discretion." State, ex rel. Haines, v. Indus. Comm. (1972), 29 Ohio St.2d 15, 16 [58 O.O.2d 70]. Furthermore, "where the record contains some evidence to support the commission...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases