 |
|
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State ex rel Ellwood Engineering Casting Company v. Industrial Commission of Ohio6/27/2002
(REGULAR CALENDAR)
DECISION
ON OBJECTIONS TO THE MAGISTRATE'S DECISION IN MANDAMUS
. Relator, Ellwood Engineering Casting Company, has filed an original action in mandamus requesting this court to issue a writ of mandamus to order respondent, Industrial Commission of Ohio ("commission"), to vacate its order that invoked the commission's continuing jurisdiction, pursuant to R.C. 4123.52, in order to consider a claim for death benefits relating to the death of Kenneth Foltz. Relator also asks this court to issue a writ to order the commission to deny the May 2000 motion filed by Frances Foltz, asking the commission to hear her claim for death benefits. The commission filed a motion to dismiss arguing relator had an adequate remedy at law.
. This court referred the matter to a magistrate, pursuant to Civ.R. 53(C) and Section (M), Loc.R. 12 of the Tenth District Court of Appeals, who rendered a decision including findings of fact and conclusions of law. (Attached as Appendix A.) The magistrate decided that the motion to dismiss filed by the commission should be overruled. Likewise, the magistrate decided the requested writ of mandamus should be denied as relator failed to show the commission improperly exercised its continuing jurisdiction, pursuant to R.C. 4123.52, and failed to show the claim was barred by the two-year statute of limitations in R.C. 4123.84.
. Relator and respondent have filed objections to the magistrate's decision. Relator argues that there is no valid basis for the commission's exercise of continuing jurisdiction, that the magistrate failed to apply collateral estoppel and that the commission lacks jurisdiction as it has previously found Kenneth Foltz's death was not work-related. Respondent argues that relator has an adequate remedy at law pursuant to R.C. 4123.512.
. In 1995, Kenneth Foltz sustained an injury in the course and scope of his employment and his worker's compensation claim was allowed. Mr. Foltz died one month later. Mary Foltz, decedent's wife, filed a claim for death benefits listing herself as the only person dependent on Mr. Foltz at the time of his death. Mrs. Foltz did not list Mr. Foltz's daughter, Frances, who was not living at home at the time of Mr. Foltz's death. Mrs. Foltz's claim was denied on the basis that there was no causal connection to Mr. Foltz's employment.
. In 2000, Frances Foltz asked the commission to exercise continuing jurisdiction to consider her claim for death benefits, as she did not receive notice of the 1995 hearing on her step-mother's claim. The motion was denied by a staff hearing officer. Frances filed an appeal which the commission construed as a request for reconsideration and denied it. Frances then filed a letter explaining that her first motion should have been heard by a district hearing officer and the subsequent filing should have been heard by a staff hearing officer as an appeal and not by the commission as a request for reconsideration.
. In an order mailed March 13, 2001, the commission set a hearing to determine whether to exercise continuing jurisdiction. Following the July 10, 2001 hearing, the commission determined an exercise of continuing jurisdiction was proper based on a mistake of law. The commission then set a hearing to consider the merits of Frances' claim. Prior to a decision on the merits of Frances' claim, relator filed this action in mandamus.
. In order to be entitled to a writ of mandamus, relator must demonstrate that he has a clear legal right to the relief prayed for, that respondents are under a clear legal duty to perform the acts, and that relator has no plain and adequate remedy in
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Ohio Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
|
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|