State ex rel. Dolgencorp, Inc. v. Indus. Comm'n
Annotate this Case
Justia Opinion Summary
Want to stay in the know about new opinions from the Supreme Court of Ohio?
Sign up for free summaries delivered directly to your inbox. Learn More ›
You already receive new opinion summaries from Supreme Court of Ohio. Did you know we offer summary newsletters for even more practice areas and jurisdictions? Explore them here.
Employee splashed bleach in her left eye while working for Employer. While Employee lost little vision as a result of the accident, Employee experienced other complications, including light sensitivity and reduced depth perception. Employee subsequently underwent a corneal transplant. Employee sought scheduled-loss compensation under Ohio Rev. Code 4123.57(B), alleging she had sustained a total loss of vision in her left eye due to the removal of her cornea. A staff hearing officer for Industrial Commission of Ohio agreed and awarded Employee a total loss of use. Employer filed a complaint in mandamus. The court of appeals issued a writ ordering the commission to vacate its order, concluding that the commission had abused its discretion in awarding compensation for a total loss of vision. The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the court of appeals pursuant to State ex rel. Baker v. Coast to Coast Manpower, L.L.C.
Download PDF
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State ex rel. Dolgencorp, Inc. v. Indus. Comm., Slip Opinion No. 2011-Ohio-4606.] NOTICE This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports. Readers are requested to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any typographical or other formal errors in the opinion, in order that corrections may be made before the opinion is published. SLIP OPINION NO. 2011-OHIO-4606 THE STATE EX REL. DOLGENCORP, INC., APPELLANT, v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF OHIO ET AL., APPELLEES. [Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State ex rel. Dolgencorp, Inc. v. Indus. Comm., Slip Opinion No. 2011-Ohio-4606.] Workers Compensation R.C. 4123.57(B) Scheduled-loss compensation Loss of vision Effect of corrective surgery State v. Baker 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. SUPREME COURT OF OHIO {¶ 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 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., ___ Ohio St.3d ___, 2011-Ohio-2721, the judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed. Judgment affirmed. 2 January Term, 2011 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., ___ Ohio St.3d ___, 2011-Ohio-2721. __________________ 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. Philip J. Fulton Law Office, Ross R. Fulton, and Philip J. Fulton, for appellant Joanne R. Simpson. ______________________ 3
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.
