Ohio Supreme Court, 1997

State ex rel. Hall v. Industrial Commission

Ohio Supreme Court · Decided November 19, 1997 · Cook, Douglas, Moyer, Pfeifer, Resnick, Stratton, Sweeney

80 Ohio St. 3d 289; 685 N.E.2d 1245

Cases that cite this one

12 later published cases cite this decision.

State ex rel. Hartness v. Kroger Co. (Ohio 1998)
State ex rel. Hartness v. Kroger Co. (Ohio 1998)
Saunders v. O-Kan Marine Repair, Unpublished Decision (4-22-2003) (Ohio Ct. App. 2003)
State ex rel. Lopez v. Interstate Rd. Mgt. Corp. (Ohio Ct. App. 2021)
State ex rel. Paraskevopoulos v. Industrial Commission (Ohio 1998)
State ex rel. Roy v. Industrial Commission (Ohio 1998)
State Ex Rel. Hall v. Poff Plastics, 08ap-34 (9-2-2008) (Ohio Ct. App. 2008)
Bozeman v. Unisource Corp., Unpublished Decision (2-20-2003) (Ohio Ct. App. 2003)
State Ex Rel. Pennington v. Indus. Comm., Unpublished Decision (6-18-2002) (Ohio Ct. App. 2002)
State ex rel. Roy v. Indus. Comm. (Ohio 1998)
State ex rel. Paraskevopoulos v. Indus. Comm. (Ohio 1998)
State ex rel. Hall v. Indus. Comm. (Ohio 1997)

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.

The court of appeals vacated the commission’s order and directed it to issue a new order finding that claimant continued to be permanently and totally disabled. Upon review, we affirm that judgment, but do so for reasons other than those relied upon by that court.

In State ex rel. Draganic v. Indus. Comm. (1996), 75 Ohio St.3d 461, 663 N.E.2d 929, issued subsequent to the lower court’s decision in this case, we reversed the judgment of the court of appeals. In Draganic, we held that the commission is not required to extend permanent total disability compensation beyond the date specified in an interlocutory permanent total disability order.

This leaves us to address the commission’s evidentiary defense of its order. Upon so doing, we find that the commission’s order not only does not meet State ex rel. Noll v. Indus. Comm. (1991), 57 Ohio St.3d 203, 567 N.E.2d 245, but also that claimant qualifies for relief consistent with State ex rel. Gay v. Mihm (1994), 68 Ohio St.3d 315, 626 N.E.2d 666.

*292The commission’s order clearly defies Noll — a deficiency that is prerequisite to any consideration of Gay relief. The commission’s decision was based on claimant’s age, a factor which the commission felt made claimant amenable to retraining. Age, however, is immaterial if claimant lacks the intellectual capacity to learn. The claimant has a sixth-grade education and is illiterate. His work history consists entirely of extremely heavy physical labor that is now well beyond his physical capacities. There is no explanation as to how or for what jobs claimant is able to retrain.

These factors not only compel a finding of Noll insufficiency, but the issuance of relief pursuant to Gay as well. Since it is almost impossible to conceive of a sedentary position for which an illiterate person with a background in heavy labor is qualified, we find that a return of the cause to the commission for further consideration would be futile.

Accordingly, the judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed, but for the reasons stated above.

Judgment affirmed.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.

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