[Cite as State ex rel. Corman v. Allied Holdings, Inc., 132 Ohio St.3d 202, 2012-Ohio-2579.] 

THE STATE EX REL. CORMAN, APPELLANT, v. ALLIED HOLDINGS, INC. ET AL.,

APPELLEES. 

[Cite as State ex rel. Corman v. Allied Holdings, Inc., 

132 Ohio St.3d 202, 2012-Ohio-2579.] 

Workers’ compensation—Temporary total disability—Retirement—Claimant’s 

departure from labor force precludes award of temporary total disability 

benefits when claimant makes no effort to find other work and offers no proof 

of medical inability to perform other work.

(No. 2010-2002—Submitted April 24, 2012—Decided June 14, 2012.) 

APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, 

No. 10AP-38, 2010-Ohio-5153. 

__________________

Per Curiam. 

{¶ 1} A claimant who permanently leaves the work force for reasons 

unrelated to his or her industrial injury cannot receive temporary total disability 

compensation (“TTC”). State ex rel. Pierron v. Indus. Comm., 120 Ohio St.3d 40, 

2008-Ohio-5245, 896 N.E.2d 140, ¶ 9. Appellee Industrial Commission of Ohio 

denied appellant Ronald R. Corman’s application for TTC after finding, among 

other things, that Corman had abandoned the work force for reasons unrelated to 

his injury. Corman challenges that decision. 

{¶ 2} Corman has an allowed workers’ compensation claim arising from 

a 2002 injury. He retired from appellee Allied Holdings, Inc. a year later and 

never worked again. The record contains no evidence that he was medically 

incapable of other work. In 2009, the commission denied Corman’s request to 

have TTC reinstated. It found, among other things, that Corman’s retirement was 

voluntary and unrelated to his injury. The commission noted that Corman never 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

2 

sought other work in the years after he left Allied Holdings, thus demonstrating 

his intent to permanently abandon the labor market. 

{¶ 3} Corman filed a complaint in mandamus in the Court of Appeals for 

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

denying TTC. The court of appeals, however, agreed that Corman had abandoned 

the work force for reasons unrelated to his injury and denied the writ. 

{¶ 4} This cause is now before this court on Corman’s appeal as of right. 

{¶ 5} TTC compensates claimants “for the loss of earnings which he [or 

she] incurs while the injury heals.” State ex rel. Ashcraft v. Indus. Comm., 34 

Ohio St.3d 42, 44, 517 N.E.2d 533 (1987). There “can be no lost earnings, 

however, or even a potential for lost earnings, if the claimant is no longer part of 

the active work force.” Pierron at ¶ 9. Thus, “[w]hen the reason for this absence 

from the work force is unrelated to the industrial injury, temporary total disability 

compensation is foreclosed.” Id. 

{¶ 6} There are important similarities between the case before us and

Pierron. Both claimants sought TTC years after retiring from their former 

positions of employment. In those intervening years, neither individual made a 

credible effort to secure other employment. Neither claimant produced evidence 

of a medical inability to perform other work during those years, prompting the 

commission to conclude in each case that the claimant had permanently left the 

work force. In upholding the commission’s order in Pierron, we explained that 

[w]hen a departure from the entire work force is not motivated by 

injury, we presume it to be a lifestyle choice, and as we stated in 

State ex rel. Pepsi-Cola Bottling Co. v. Morse (1995), 72 Ohio 

St.3d 210, 216, 648 N.E.2d 827, workers’ compensation benefits 

were never intended to subsidize lost or diminished earnings 

attributable to lifestyle decisions. In this case, the injured worker 
January Term, 2012 

3 

did not choose to leave his employer in 1997 [i.e., his job was 

eliminated], but once that separation nevertheless occurred, Pierron 

had a choice: seek other employment or work no further. Pierron 

chose the latter. He cannot therefore credibly allege that his lack 

of income from 2001 and beyond is due to industrial injury. 

Accordingly, he is ineligible for temporary total disability 

compensation. 

Id., 120 Ohio St.3d 40, 2008-Ohio-5245, 896 N.E.2d 140, at ¶ 11. 

{¶ 7} Corman’s attempt to distinguish Pierron is not persuasive. 

Corman contends that he retired from his former position of employment with 

Allied Holdings because of his injury—a claim that was not made in Pierron. 

The commission, however, did not find that Corman’s departure from Allied 

Holdings was injury-induced, but even if it had, it would not advance his cause. 

As in Pierron, there was no evidence of a medical inability to perform other work 

in the years between Corman’s departure from Allied Holdings and his request for 

TTC, so Corman had the same choice as Pierron—seek other employment or 

work no further. When Corman elected the latter, he eliminated the possibility of, 

or potential for, lost wages. He cannot, therefore, credibly assert that he has lost 

income due to his industrial injury. 

{¶ 8} The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed. 

Judgment affirmed. 

O’CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O’DONNELL,

LANZINGER, CUPP, and MCGEE BROWN, JJ., concur. 

_________________ 

Clements, Mahin & Cohen Co., L.P.A., William E. Clements, and Paul A. 

Lewandowski, for appellant. 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

4 

Scott, Scriven & Wahoff, L.L.P., Richard Goldberg, William J. Wahoff, 

and Nelva J. Smith, for appellee Allied Holdings, Inc. 

Michael DeWine, Attorney General, and Charissa D. Payer, Assistant 

Attorney General, for appellee Industrial Commission of Ohio. 

Philip J. Fulton Law Office, Philip J. Fulton, and Ross R. Fulton, urging 

reversal for amicus curiae Ohio Association of Claimants’ Counsel and Ohio 

Association for Justice. 

Garvin & Hickey, L.L.C., Preston J. Garvin, and Michael J. Hickey, 

urging affirmance for amicus curiae Ohio Chamber of Commerce. 

Bricker & Eckler, L.L.P., and Thomas R. Sant, urging affirmance for 

amicus curiae Ohio Chapter, National Federation of Independent Business. 

Vorys, Sater, Seymour & Pease, L.L.P., and Robert A. Minor, urging 

affirmance for amicus curiae Ohio Self-Insurers Association. 

______________________