State ex rel. Akers v. Robertshaw Controls
State ex rel. Akers v. Robertshaw Controls
Dissenting Opinion
dissenting. I respectfully dissent. I would affirm the judgment of the court of appeals for the reasons stated in the court of appeals’ opinion and the decision of its magistrate.
Opinion of the Court
The judgment of the court of appeals is reversed. The cause is returned to the Industrial Commission for relief consistent with State ex rel. Gay v. Mihm (1994), 68 Ohio St.3d 315, 626 N.E.2d 666.
Concurring in Part
concurring in part and dissenting in part. I would also reverse the judgment of the court of appeals. However, I would not grant Gay relief. The commission has not yet determined the extent of claimant’s psychological claim, so Gay relief is inappropriate. The matter should be returned to the commission to conduct such an analysis. Gay relief is premature. Therefore, I dissent from the majority’s decision to grant Gay relief.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- The State ex rel. Akers v. Robertshaw Controls
- Status
- Published