Case ID: ohio-st-3d_91/html/0574-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Douglas, J.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

The State ex rel. Mead Corporation, Appellee, v. Industrial Commission of Ohio et al.; Harris, Appellant.
    [Cite as State ex rel. Mead Corp. v. Indus. Comm. (2001), 91 Ohio St.3d 574.]
    (No. 00-2190
    Submitted April 24, 2001
    Decided June 6, 2001.)
    
      Thompson & Hiñe, L.L.P., and Robert W. Myers, for appellee.
    
      Livorno & Arnett Co., L.P.A., and John F. Livorno, for appellant.
   The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed consistent with the opinion of the court of appeals.

Moyer, C.J., Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.

Douglas, Resnigk and F.E. Sweeney, JJ., dissent.

Douglas, J.,

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

Resnick and F.E. Sweeney, JJ., concur in the foregoing dissenting opinion.