[Cite as State ex rel. Dolgencorp, Inc. v. Indus. Comm., 130 Ohio St.3d 20, 2011-Ohio-4606.] 

THE STATE EX REL. DOLGENCORP, INC., APPELLEE, v. INDUSTRIAL 

COMMISSION OF OHIO ET AL., APPELLANTS. 

[Cite as State ex rel. Dolgencorp, Inc. v. Indus. Comm., 

130 Ohio St.3d 20, 2011-Ohio-4606.] 

Workers’ compensation—R.C. 4123.57(B)—Scheduled-loss compensation—Loss 

of vision—Effect of corrective surgery—State ex rel. Baker v. Coast to 

Coast Manpower, L.L.C., followed. 

(No. 2010-0124—Submitted August 8, 2011—Decided September 15, 2011.) 

APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, No. 08AP-1014, 

2009-Ohio-6565. 

__________________ 

Per Curiam. 

{¶ 1} Appellant Joanne R. Simpson seeks compensation pursuant to R.C. 

4123.57(B) for a total loss of left-eye vision. Simpson splashed bleach in her left 

eye while working for appellee, Dolgencorp, Inc. (a.k.a. Dollar General). The eye 

was copiously flushed at the emergency room, and several medications for 

inflammation were prescribed. 

{¶ 2} Simpson lost little vision as a result of the accident, with three 

doctors assessing her loss at 5 percent. She did, however, experience other 

complications as a result of the accident, including light sensitivity, tearing, 

excessive blinking, glare phenomena, and reduced depth perception. 

{¶ 3} In 2007, Simpson became a candidate for a corneal transplant. After 

the procedure was performed, Simpson’s left-eye vision was 20/80 uncorrected 

and 20/60 corrected. 

{¶ 4} Simpson requested scheduled-loss compensation under R.C. 

4123.57(B), alleging that she had sustained a total loss of vision in her left eye 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

2 

due to the removal of her cornea. A staff hearing officer for appellant, Industrial 

Commission of Ohio, agreed: 

{¶ 5} “The Staff Hearing Officer finds the injured worker sustained an 

injury to her left eye as the result of a chemical splash in her eye. Following 

treatment, it was determined that the injured worker needed a lens [sic, ‘cornea’] 

transplant. The [cornea] was surgically removed on 08/28/2007. The surgical 

removal of the [cornea] resulted in a total loss of use of the left eye. Therefore, a 

total loss of use is awarded consistent with O.R.C. 4123.57(B).” 

{¶ 6} Further appeal was refused. 

{¶ 7} Dolgencorp filed a complaint in mandamus in the Court of Appeals 

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

awarding compensation for a total loss of vision. The court of appeals agreed and 

issued a writ that ordered the commission to vacate its order and to issue a new 

one that denied compensation for total loss of vision. 

{¶ 8} Simpson and the commission now appeal to this court as of right. 

{¶ 9} Pursuant to State ex rel. Baker v. Coast to Coast Manpower, L.L.C., 

129 Ohio St.3d 138, 2011-Ohio-2721, 950 N.E.2d 924, the judgment of the court 

of appeals is affirmed. 

Judgment affirmed. 

LUNDBERG STRATTON, O’DONNELL, LANZINGER, and CUPP, JJ., concur. 

O’CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER and MCGEE BROWN, JJ., dissent for the 

reasons stated in the dissenting opinion in State ex rel. Baker v. Coast to Coast 

Manpower, L.L.C., 129 Ohio St.3d 138, 2011-Ohio-2721, 950 N.E.2d 924. 

__________________ 

 Reminger Co., L.P.A., and Mick L. Proxmire, for appellee. 

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

Attorney General, for appellant Industrial Commission of Ohio. 
January Term, 2011 

3

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

appellant Joanne R. Simpson. 

______________________