Case ID: ohio-st-3d_83/html/0389-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Lundberg Stratton, J.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

The State ex rel. Temple, Appellee, v. Industrial Commission of Ohio et al.; AT&T Technologies, Inc., Appellant.
    [Cite as State ex rel. Temple v. Indus. Comm. (1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 389.]
    (No. 97-1252
    Submitted August 19, 1998
    Decided October 14, 1998.)
    
      Law Offices of James R. Nein and Matthew R. Copp, for appellee Phyllis J. Temple.
    
      Porter, Wright, Morris & Arthur and Karl J. Sutter, for appellant.
   The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed consistent with the opinion of the court of appeals.

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

Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., dissent.

Lundberg Stratton, J.,

dissenting. I would reverse the court of appeals and reinstate the order of the Industrial Commission.

Cook, J., concurs in the foregoing dissenting opinion.