[Cite as State ex rel. Bea v. Kroger Co., 90 Ohio St.3d 380, 2000-Ohio-184.] 

THE STATE EX REL. BEA ET AL., APPELLEES, v. KROGER COMPANY, APPELLANT. 

[Cite as State ex rel. Bea v. Kroger Co. (2000), 90 Ohio St.3d 380.] 

Workers’ compensation — Denial by Industrial Commission of claimant’s 

motions seeking reinstatement of temporary total disability 

compensation — Court of appeals’ return of cause to commission for 

further consideration and amended order affirmed. 

(No. 99-459 — Submitted August 22, 2000 — Decided December 20, 2000.) 

APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, No. 97APD11-1523. 

 Appellee-claimant, Charlene Bea, was injured on July 2, 1994, while 

working for appellant Kroger Company, a self-insured employer. Kroger certified 

her claim, the application for which described her injury as “strained back, neck 

and legs.” Appellee Industrial Commission of Ohio, however, has consistently 

listed the allowed conditions as “acute lumbosacral sprain.” 

 Claimant initially missed two and one-half weeks of work and received 

temporary total disability compensation benefits (“TTC”) from Kroger. She 

returned and continued to work until March 17, 1996, when her industrial injury 

again forced her from work. Kroger immediately began paying TTC. 

 In July 1996, claimant’s attending physician, Dr. C. Duane Bellamy, 

submitted a C-84 request for TTC.1 The C-84 request certified claimant as unable 

to return to her former position of employment. Dr. Bellamy left blank a space in 

which to record “narrative diagnosis(es) for allowed conditions being treated 

which prevent return to work.” He did, however, list under the headings 

“objective and subjective findings” “restricted trunk and leg range of motion” and 

low back pain, respectively. 

 Dr. Bellamy also prepared a narrative report on the same date. Under the 

heading “impression,” he wrote: 
2 

 “1. Chronic cervical sprain/strain resulting in chronic myofascial soreness 

and tenderness in the upper back musculature and resulting in chronic pain in the 

upper extremities. 

 “2. Chronic lumbar sprain/strain. Although Ms. Bea describes radiation 

of pain into both legs, there is no indication on physical examination or on 

previous diagnostic work-up of a radiculopathy. 

 “3. Chronic pain syndrome. Ms. Bea displays many of the features of 

chronic pain syndrome including pain which has persisted for 2 years after an 

injury and has not responded to conservative therapy. The pain is interfering with 

her ability to function at home and in the work-place. She also shows signs of 

depression, poor sleep pattern, the development of a dependent personality, and 

generalized physical deconditioning.” 

 On August 24, 1996, Kroger stopped paying TTC. Approximately two 

months later, claimant filed dual motions with the commission seeking TTC 

reinstatement. She offered in support Dr. Bellamy’s October 14, 1996 request, 

which, for the first time, listed “lumbosacral sprain/strain” as the sole cause of 

disability. 

 A December 4, 1996 hearing before a district hearing officer (“DHO”) 

held the issue in abeyance while claimant, who was at that time unrepresented, 

obtained additional evidence sought by the hearing officer. Three months later, 

claimant’s motions were denied. 

 “[B]ased on evidence that the claimant’s disability is due to several nonallowed conditions including ‘CERVICAL SPRAIN, CHRONIC PAIN 

SYNDROME, DEPRESSION’ * * * the claimant cannot be found disabled due 

to the allowed claim.” 

 A staff hearing officer affirmed, finding the subsequent letter from Dr. 

Bellamy to be unpersuasive. Further appeal was refused by the commission. 
3 

 Claimant filed a complaint in mandamus in the Court of Appeals for 

Franklin County, alleging that the commission abused its discretion in denying 

TTC. The court found that the commission may have abused its discretion in 

refusing to pay TTC, given Dr. Bellamy’s October 14, 1996 C-84, which the court 

feared the commission had overlooked. It thus returned the cause to the 

commission for further consideration and amended order. 

 This cause is now before this court upon an appeal as of right. 

__________________ 

Thompson, Meier & Dersom and Thomas D. Thompson, for appellee Bea. 

Betty D. Montgomery, Attorney General, and Jon D. Grandon, Assistant 

Attorney General, for appellee Industrial Commission. 

Porter, Wright, Morris & Arthur and Karl J. Sutter, for appellant. 

__________________ 

Per Curiam. Kroger certified claimant’s initial C-50 workers’ 

compensation claim application for “strain of legs, back and neck”—the latter two 

encompassing the cervical back area. Commission orders, however, have 

uniformly listed “acute lumbosacral sprain” as the only allowed condition. It is 

unclear why this is so, and we find that this lack of clarity hinders further review. 

 Dr. Bellamy stated that a chronic pain syndrome arising from claimant’s 

neck/upper back was interfering with her ability to work. If cervical strain is an 

allowed condition, then there is no basis for the allegation that nonallowed 

conditions are contributing to claimant’s inability to return to her former position 

of employment.2 If it is not a part of the claim, however, Kroger’s assertions may 

have merit. We, therefore, find further consideration to be critical. 

 The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed, and the cause is returned 

to the commission for further consideration and clarification. 

Judgment affirmed. 
4 

 MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and 

LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur. 

FOOTNOTES:

 1. The first page of this two-page form is dated July 10, 1996, and the 

second July 29, 1996. The parties variously refer to it by both dates. The July 10 

date will be used here. 

 2. We recognize that the DHO’s order cites Dr. Bellamy’s reference 

to “depression” as well, but that clearly is just a passing observation on the 

doctor’s part. Nothing in Bellamy’s July 10, 1996 narrative implies that claimant 

has an emotional condition that is contributing to an inability to work.