Title: State ex rel. Draganic v. Indus. Comm.

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

THE STATE EX REL. DRAGANIC, APPELLANT, v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF OHIO, 
APPELLEE. 
[Cite as State ex rel. Draganic v. Indus. Comm. (1998), ___ Ohio St.3d ___.] 
Workers’ 
compensation 
— 
Application 
for permanent total disability 
compensation denied by Industrial Commission — Appeal to Supreme 
Court dismissed as moot, when. 
(No. 96-90 — Submitted September 16, 1998 — Decided October 14, 1998.) 
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, No. 93APD10-1491. 
 
Appellant-claimant Pete A. Draganic, Jr.’s 1962 workers’ compensation 
claim was allowed for knee and back conditions.  In 1991, he moved appellee 
Industrial Commission of Ohio for permanent total disability compensation 
(“PTD”).  In a January 10, 1992 interlocutory order, a commission deputy awarded 
claimant PTD from January 11, 1992 to  April 21, 1992 only.  The order also 
stated: 
 
“It is the finding of the Commission that the claimant is permanently and 
totally disabled; that compensation for such disability be awarded from 1/11/92 to 
4/21/92; further payment of compensation to be considered at the next scheduled 
hearing on the issue of continuation of permanent and total disability * * *. 
 
“Claim files to be referred to the Legal Section for preparation of a 
statement of facts to be completed within 43 days from the date of publication of 
this order and then set for hearing before the members of the Industrial 
Commission on the issue of continuation of the award of permanent and total 
disability compensation.” 
 
The commission subsequently denied further compensation, after finding 
that claimant could do sustained remunerative employment.  Claimant filed a 
complaint in mandamus in the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, alleging that 
 
2
the commission abused its discretion in denying further PTD.  The court of 
appeals agreed, after finding that the commission was bound by its January 10, 
1992 order.  The commission appealed that judgment to this court on November 7, 
1994. 
 
Attempting to force the commission to pay PTD during the pendency of the 
appeal to this court, claimant filed a contempt motion in the court of appeals.  The 
commission responded with a memorandum contra and a motion to stay the court 
of appeals’ judgment.  On December 6, 1995, the court of appeals denied the 
claimant’s contempt motion and granted the commission’s motion for stay.  
Claimant’s request for reconsideration was denied. 
 
Claimant appeals that judgment to this court. 
__________________ 
 
Garson & Associates Co., L.P.A., David L. Meyerson and Grace A. Szubski, 
for appellant. 
 
Betty D. Montgomery, Attorney General, and Gerald H. Waterman, 
Assistant Attorney General, for appellee. 
__________________ 
 
Per Curiam.  Subsequent to the completion of briefing in this case, we 
decided State ex rel. Draganic v. Indus. Comm. (1996), 75 Ohio St.3d 461, 663 
N.E.2d 929.  There, we held that the commission was not bound by its January 10, 
1992 interlocutory order and did not abuse its discretion in denying PTD 
subsequent to April 20, 1992.  Claimant’s appeal is, therefore, moot, and it is 
dismissed. 
Appeal dismissed. 
 
MOYER, C.J., PFEIFER, COOK and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur. 
 
DOUGLAS, RESNICK and F.E. SWEENEY, JJ., dissent.