Title: State ex rel. Kroger Co. v. Paysen

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

[Cite as State ex rel. Kroger Co. v. Paysen, 109 Ohio St.3d 515, 2006-Ohio-3057.] 
 
 
THE STATE EX REL. KROGER COMPANY, APPELLANT, v. PAYSEN ET AL., 
APPELLEES. 
[Cite as State ex rel. Kroger Co. v. Paysen,  
109 Ohio St.3d 515, 2006-Ohio-3057.] 
Workers’ compensation — Compensation for permanent total disability — 
Disqualification not established by refusal to accept job offer. 
(No. 2005-1582 — Submitted May 24, 2006 — Decided July 5, 2006.) 
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County,  
No. 04AP-810, 2005-Ohio-3787. 
__________________ 
 
Per Curiam. 
{¶ 1} We are asked to consider whether a claimant’s refusal of a job 
offer bars compensation for permanent and total disability when her physician has 
stated that she cannot perform sustained remunerative work.  We hold that it does 
not. 
{¶ 2} Appellee Anne B. Paysen has two allowed workers’ compensation 
claims for injuries sustained while working for appellant Kroger Company.  The 
1991 claim was allowed for cervical sprain and thoracic sprain.  The 1992 claim 
was originally allowed for bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome, bilateral cubital 
tunnel syndrome, reflex sympathetic dystrophy of both wrists, and depressive 
disorder. 
{¶ 3} A 1999 application for compensation for permanent total disability 
was denied by appellee Industrial Commission of Ohio.  At some point thereafter, 
“panic disorder” was additionally allowed in her claim.  In 2003, Paysen reapplied 
for permanent total disability compensation.  Among the medical evidence 
submitted was the report of treating psychologist Jane E. Cottrell, who stated that 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
Paysen’s psychological conditions rendered her incapable of “work of any kind, 
however sedentary or lacking in stress that work may be.”  Based in part on that 
report, permanent total disability compensation was granted on May 27, 2004. 
{¶ 4} Kroger filed a claim in mandamus in the Court of Appeals for 
Franklin County, alleging that the commission had abused its discretion in 
awarding permanent total disability compensation.  In addition to challenging the 
evidence on which the commission relied, it asserted that it had extended a light-
duty job offer to Paysen in 1999 and had never revoked that offer.  Because 
Paysen refused to attempt the job, Kroger argued that she was ineligible for 
permanent total disability compensation.  The court of appeals disagreed and 
denied the writ, prompting Kroger’s appeal to this court as of right. 
{¶ 5} Neither of Kroger’s two challenges to Paysen’s permanent total 
disability award has merit.  First, the job offer was not shown to be consistent 
with all of the claimant’s allowed conditions.  In any event, when an attending 
physician has told his or her patient that the patient cannot do sustained 
remunerative work, that patient is not disqualified from permanent total disability 
compensation by relying on the doctor’s advice in refusing to attempt a job 
offered by the employer.  Second, contrary to Kroger’s representation, there is no 
evidentiary infirmity in the reports of Dr. Cottrell and Dr. Ralph Rohner, which 
indeed serve as evidence supporting the commission’s decision. 
{¶ 6} The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed. 
Judgment affirmed. 
 
MOYER, C.J., RESNICK, PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O’CONNOR, 
O’DONNELL and LANZINGER, JJ., concur. 
__________________ 
 
Porter, Wright, Morris & Arthur, L.L.P., and Karl J. Sutter, for appellant. 
 
Agee, Clymer, Mitchell & Laret and C. Russell Canestraro, for appellee 
Anne Paysen. 
January Term, 2006 
3 
 
Jim Petro, Attorney General, and Lasheyl N. Sowell, Assistant Attorney 
General, for appellee Industrial Commission of Ohio. 
______________________