Ohio Supreme Court, 1988

State ex rel. Gibson v. Industrial Commission

Ohio Supreme Court · Decided November 16, 1988 · Brown, Douglas, Holmes, Locher, Moyer, Sweeney, Wright

39 Ohio St. 3d 319; 530 N.E.2d 916; 1988 Ohio LEXIS 368

Cases that cite this one

32 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.

Erwin v. Erwin, 9-08-15 (2-2-2009) (Ohio Ct. App. 2009)
State v. Oliver (Ohio Ct. App. 2023)
Helfrich v. Foor Family Invests., L.L.C. (Ohio Ct. App. 2022)
Deering v. Beatty (Ohio Ct. App. 2021)
Roe v. Boland (Ohio Ct. App. 2021)
State v. Brown (Ohio Ct. App. 2014)
State ex rel. Camaco, L.L.C. v. Albu (Ohio Ct. App. 2014)
State ex rel. Hensley v. Indus. Comm. (Ohio Ct. App. 2014)
Reed v. Jagnow (Ohio Ct. App. 2013)
In re Lipford, 88267 (7-12-2007) (Ohio Ct. App. 2007)
State Ex Rel. Berman Ind. v. Indus. Comm., Unpublished Decision (9-27-2005) (Ohio Ct. App. 2005)
State ex rel. Rollins v. Industrial Commission (Ohio 2005)
State ex rel. Marion County North Central Ohio Rehab Center v. Snare (Ohio 2005)
Wallace v. City of Rocky River, Unpublished Decision (8-1-2002) (Ohio Ct. App. 2002)
State ex rel. Quarto Mining Co. v. Foreman (Ohio 1997)
Lewis v. Trimble (Ohio 1997)
State ex rel. Zollner v. Industrial Commission (Ohio 1993)
State Ex Rel. B.F. Goodrich Co. v. Industrial Commission (Ohio Ct. App. 1991)
State ex rel. Truslow v. Industrial Commission (Ohio 1991)
State ex rel. Cordray v. Industrial Commission (Ohio 1990)
State ex rel. Basham v. Consolidation Coal Co. (Ohio 1989)
State ex rel. Burton v. Industrial Commission (Ohio 1989)
L.G. v. R.G. (Ohio Ct. App. 2026)
Dillon v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr. (Ohio Ct. App. 2023)
State ex rel. Noxious Vegetation Control v. Bur. of Workers' Comp. (Ohio Ct. App. 2015)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

Appellant’s sole proposition before this court is that the commission’s assumption of jurisdiction over an issue that she did not intend to relitigate violated her right to due process of law. We hold that this issue was not raised previously, and therefore has been waived. See State v. Awan (1986), 22 Ohio St. 3d 120, 22 OBR 199, 489 N.E. 2d 277, syllabus; Blausey v. Stein (1980), 61 Ohio St. 2d 264, 15 O.O. 3d 268, 400 N.E. 2d 408; F. Enterprises v. Kentucky Fried Chicken Corp. (1976), 47 Ohio St. 2d 154, 1 O.O. 3d 90, 351 N.E. 2d 121.

Appellant unsuccessfully attempts to distinguish these and similar cases cited by appellees, contending that the case at bar, unlike those noted above, is a mandamus action. She argues that the present issue is before this court as if originally filed here, and thus her due process argument is not waived. However, in State, ex rel. Kay, v. Cleveland (1971), 27 Ohio St. 2d 37, 56 O.O. 2d 21, 271 N.E. 2d 784, an appeal from a denial of a writ of mandamus, we relied on a waiver theory in refusing to consider a newly proffered free-speech argument.

Accordingly, the judgment of the court of appeals denying the writ is therefore affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Moyer, C.J., Sweeney, Locher, Holmes, Douglas, Wright and H. Brown, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.