Title: State ex rel. Continental Hose v. Swartz

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

[Cite as State ex rel. Continental Hose v. Swartz, 92 Ohio St.3d 27, 2001-Ohio-
125.] 
 
 
 
THE STATE EX REL. CONTINENTAL HOSE, APPELLANT, v. SWARTZ; BUREAU OF 
WORKERS’ COMPENSATION, APPELLEE. 
[Cite as State ex rel. Continental Hose v. Swartz (2001), 92 Ohio St.3d 27.] 
Workers’ compensation — When Bureau of Workers’ Compensation lacks 
jurisdiction to change date of disability, it cannot change the risk 
assignment. 
(No. 99-2078 — Submitted March 27, 2001 — Decided June 13, 2001.) 
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, No. 98AP-1435. 
__________________ 
 
Per Curiam.  Claimant Minnie Swartz was diagnosed with an 
occupational disease on May 20, 1996.  Claimant continued to work for her 
employer, appellant Continental Hose (“Continental”), until her condition 
eventually forced her from her job commencing on June 24, 1996. 
 
During this time, Continental was switching from state fund insurance to 
self-insurance.  That process was completed on June 1, 1996.  Claimant 
subsequently filed a workers’ compensation claim, which was granted by appellee 
Ohio Bureau of Workers’ Compensation and assigned to Continental’s new self-
insured risk number. 
 
In October, Continental sought a hearing to determine whether the claim 
should be assigned to its old state fund risk or its new self-insured risk.  However, 
the Industrial Commission of Ohio asserted a lack of jurisdiction. 
 
Continental then moved to change the date of disability from June 24, 
1996, to March 20, 1996, which preceded Continental’s switch to self-insurance.  
The commission refused to amend the date of disability, and Continental did not 
appeal. 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
 
On November 7, 1997, Continental asked the bureau for a hearing before 
its adjudicating committee on the risk-assignment question.  The bureau 
responded that the risk was properly assigned based on the date of disability.  
Continental’s continued letters to the bureau culminated in a formal order from 
the adjudicating committee that concluded: 
 
“The adjudication of a dispute concerning the date of disability and the 
determination of the amenable employer in an occupational disease claim is a 
matter that falls within the authority of the Ohio Industrial Commission rather 
than the Bureau’s Adjudicating Committee.  In the instant case[,] the Industrial 
Commission has determined the date of disability and the claim has been correctly 
charged to the employer’s self-insured policy, its coverage status on that date. 
 
“Therefore, the employer’s request for a hearing is denied as the 
Adjudicating Committee lacks authority to grant the requested relief.” 
 
That order was administratively affirmed. 
 
Continental then commenced a mandamus action before the Court of 
Appeals for Franklin County, asserting that the bureau abused its discretion in 
assigning the claim to its self-insured risk, and in doing so without a hearing.  The 
court of appeals denied the writ, prompting Continental’s appeal to this court as of 
right. 
 
R.C. 4123.291 states: 
 
“(A) An adjudicating committee appointed by the administrator of 
workers’ compensation to hear any matter specified in divisions (B)(1) to (6) of 
this section shall hear the matter within sixty days of the date on which an 
employer files the request, protest, or petition. 
 
“(B) An employer who is adversely affected by a decision of an 
adjudicating committee appointed by the administrator may appeal the decision of 
the committee to the administrator or his designee.  The employer shall file the 
appeal in writing within thirty days after the employer receives the decision of the 
January Term, 2001 
3 
adjudicating committee. The administrator or his designee shall hear the appeal 
and hold a hearing, provided that the decision of the adjudicating committee 
relates to one of the following: 
 
“* * * 
 
“(6) Any decision relating to any other risk premium matter under 
Chapters 4121., 4123., and 4131. of the Revised Code.” 
 
Contrary to the bureau’s representation, Continental clearly raised an issue 
under (B)(6) and was entitled to a hearing.  No hearing, however, occurred.  The 
bureau alternatively argues that to return the matter for hearing at this point would 
be a vain and futile act.  This argument is persuasive. 
 
Continental does not dispute that the date of disability controls the risk 
assignment of an occupational disease claim.  The commission earlier established 
claimant’s date of disability as June 24, 1996, after Continental had switched to 
self-insurance and Continental did not appeal.  Lacking jurisdiction to change the 
date of disability, the bureau is concomitantly powerless to change the risk 
assignment.  A return would indeed be pointless. 
 
The judgment of the court of appeals is hereby affirmed. 
Judgment affirmed. 
 
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and 
LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur. 
__________________ 
 
Roetzel & Andress, Douglas E. Spiker and Noel C. Shepard, for appellant. 
 
Betty D. Montgomery, Attorney General, and Craigg E. Gould, Assistant 
Attorney General, for appellee. 
__________________