Ohio Supreme Court, 1990

State ex rel. White Consolidated Industries v. Industrial Commission

Ohio Supreme Court · Decided January 10, 1990 · Brown, Douglas, Holmes, Moyer, Resnick, Sweeney, Wright

48 Ohio St. 3d 17; 548 N.E.2d 926; 1990 Ohio LEXIS 13

Cases that cite this one

5 later published cases cite this decision.

State Ex Rel. Furrie v. Indus. Comm., Unpublished Decision (4-20-2004) (Ohio Ct. App. 2003)
State ex rel. Smith v. Industrial Commission (Ohio 1990)
State Ex Rel. Delgado v. Indus. Comm., 07ap-947 (11-4-2008) (Ohio Ct. App. 2008)
State Ex Rel. Mid-Ohio Wood Prods. v. Indus., 07ap-478 (5-22-2008) (Ohio Ct. App. 2008)
Adams v. Indus. Comm. of Ohio, Unpublished Decision (10-21-2003) (Ohio Ct. App. 2003)

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.

We begin by noting that the appellate court’s opinion was issued prior to our decision in State, ex rel. Rockwell Internatl., v. Indus. Comm. (1988), 40 Ohio St. 3d 44, 531 N.E. 2d 678. There, we specifically rejected the characterization of “voluntary retirement” presented below, holding instead that:

“When a claimant’s retirement is causally related to an industrial injury, the retirement is not ‘voluntary’ so as to preclude eligibility for temporary total disability compensation.” Id. at paragraph one of the syllabus.

The voluntary nature of retirement is a factual question within the commission’s final jurisdiction. State, ex rel. Haines, v. Indus. Comm. (1972), 29 Ohio St. 2d 15, 58 O.O. 2d 70, 278 N.E. 2d 24. So long as the commission’s decision is supported by “some evidence,” there has been no abuse of discretion and mandamus will not lie. State, ex rel. Burley, v. Coil Packing, Inc. (1987), 31 Ohio St. 3d 18, 31 OBR 70, 508 N.E. 2d 936. Upon review, we find that Dr. Boumphrey’s February 22, 1985 report and the claimant’s affidavit are “some evidence” supporting the commission’s determination that claimant’s retirement was not voluntary.

Accordingly, the judgment of the court of appeals is reversed.

Judgment reversed.

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

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