State ex rel. Wilson v. Indus. Comm.

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as State ex rel. Wilson v. Indus. Comm., 100 Ohio St.3d 23, 2003-Ohio-4832.] THE STATE EX REL. WILSON, APPELLANT, v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF OHIO ET AL., APPELLEES. [Cite as State ex rel. Wilson v. Indus. Comm., 100 Ohio St.3d 23, 2003-Ohio4832.] Civil procedure Workers compensation Civ.R. 53(E)(3), applied Court of appeals denial of writ of mandamus affirmed. (No. 2002-1574 Submitted August 26, 2003 Decided September 24, 2003.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, No. 01AP-928, 2002Ohio-4289. __________________ Per Curiam. {¶1} Appellant, Angela Wilson, contested the start date of benefits to her minor child, Michael Hickman, following the death of his father, Chris D. Witt, in an industrial accident. Dissatisfied with the decision of appellee Industrial Commission of Ohio, she petitioned the Court of Appeals for Franklin County for a writ of mandamus. {¶2} The court of appeals referred the matter to a magistrate, who on March 15, 2002, issued a report recommending that the writ be denied. Thirtyfour days later, appellant filed objections to that report. The commission responded with a motion to strike the objections as untimely and appellant made no reply. The court granted that motion and ultimately adopted the magistrate s findings of fact and conclusions of law. {¶3} This cause is now before this court upon an appeal as of right. {¶4} Appellant s arguments derive directly from the conclusions of law provided in the magistrate s decision. Appellant, however, did not timely object to those conclusions as Civ.R. 53(E)(3)(a) requires. Thus, pursuant to Civ.R. SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 53(E)(3)(b) and State ex rel. Booher v. Honda of Am. Mfg., Inc. (2000), 88 Ohio St.3d 52, 723 N.E.2d 571, we can proceed no further. {¶5} Accordingly, the judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed. Judgment affirmed. MOYER, C.J., RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O CONNOR and O DONNELL, JJ., concur. __________________ George S. Maley, for appellant. Jim Petro, Attorney General, and Gerald H. Waterman, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee Industrial Commission. __________________ 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.