Case Name: INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION v. FRITZ
Court: Ohio Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1932-05-31
Citations: 13 Ohio Law Abs. 62
Docket Number: No 538
Parties: INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION v FRITZ
Judges: ROSS, PJ, and HAMILTON, J, concur in judgment of affirmance.
Reporter: The Ohio Law Abstract
Volume: 13
Pages: 62–62

Head Matter:
INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION v FRITZ
Ohio Appeals, 1st Dist, Butler Co
No 538.
Decided May 31, 1932
Gilbert Bettman, Attorney .General, Co- . lumbus, R. R. Zurmehly, Columbus, and Z. R. Morgenthaler, Hamilton, for plaintiff in error.
Harry S. Wonnell, Hamilton, for defendant in error.

Opinion:
CUSHING, J.
The only claim made by the Industrial Commission is that there was no evidence that his injury and death were due to his employment. This question was presented in the case of Industrial Commission v Tripsansky, 119 Oh St, 594, 595. That case is decisive of this question. It was purely a question for the jury to decide, and it found that his representative was entitled to compensation, and, as the evid'ence was in dispute, it was a jury question.
The judgment of the Court of Common Pleas of Butler County is affirmed.
ROSS, PJ, and HAMILTON, J, concur in judgment of affirmance.