 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State ex rel Chesbrough v. Industrial Commission of Ohio6/11/2002
(REGULAR CALENDAR)
DECISION
IN MANDAMUS ON OBJECTIONS TO THE MAGISTRATE'S DECISION
. Relator, Daniel Chesbrough, has filed this original action in mandamus requesting this court to issue a writ of mandamus ordering respondent Industrial Commission of Ohio to vacate its July 27, 2001 order denying relator's application for temporary total disability compensation and respondent's February 15, 2000 order denying his application for temporary total disability compensation.
. This court referred the matter to a magistrate, pursuant to Civ.R. 53(C) and Loc.R. 12(M) of the Tenth District Court of Appeals, who issued a decision, including findings of fact and conclusions of law. (Attached as Appendix A.) The magistrate concluded that relator failed to establish that respondent-commission had abused its discretion and that this court should deny the requested writ.
. Relator filed objections to the decision of the magistrate essentially rearguing issues already adequately addressed in that decision. For the reasons stated in the decision of the magistrate, the objections are overruled.
. Following independent review, pursuant to Civ.R. 53, we find that the magistrate has properly determined the pertinent facts and applied the salient law to them. Accordingly, we adopt the decision of the magistrate as our own, including the findings of fact and conclusions of law contained in it. In accordance with the decision of the magistrate, the requested writ is denied.
Objections overruled; writ of mandamus denied.
TYACK, P.J., and DESHLER, J., concur.
APPENDIX A
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
No. 01AP-1077
State of Ohio ex rel. Daniel Chesbrough, Relator, v. Industrial Commission of Ohio (REGULAR CALENDAR) and Dispatch Printing Co., Respondents.
MAGISTRATE'S DECISION
Rendered on February 27, 2002
Pencheff & Fraley Co. L.P.A., and Mark Heinzerling, for relator.
Betty D. Montgomery, Attorney General, and Erica L. Bass, for respondent Industrial Commission of Ohio. Ward, Kaps, Bainbridge, Maurer & Melvin, and Thomas H. Bainbridge, for respondent Dispatch Printing Co.
IN MANDAMUS
Relator, Daniel Chesbrough, has filed this original action requesting that this court issue a writ of mandamus ordering respondent Industrial Commission of Ohio ("commission") to vacate its July 27, 2001 order denying relator's application for temporary total disability ("TTD") compensation. Relator also requests a writ of mandamus ordering the commission to vacate its February 15, 2000 order denying his application for TTD compensation. Findings of Fact:
1. This is the third time relator has brought a mandamus action in this court challenging the commission's original 1998 denial of his motion for TTD compensation. See State ex rel. Chesbrough v. Indus. Comm. (Aug. 3 1999), Franklin App. No. 98AP-1013, unreported (Memorandum Decision) ("Chesbrough I"), and State ex rel. Chesbrough v. Indus. Comm. (April 4, 2001), Franklin App. No. 00AP-539, unreported (Memorandum Decision) ("Chesbrough II").
2. Relator sustained his first industrial injury, which is the cause of these actions, on February 17, 1993, and his claim was originally allowed for "sprain lumbar region."
3. By order dated November 27, 1995, a district hearing officer ("DHO") found that relator's sprain lumbar region had reached maximum medical improvement ("MMI") pursuant to the report of Dr. Kiva Shtull.
4. On January 5, 1996, relator's treating physic
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Ohio Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|