Opinion

Kinsey v. Board of Trustees

  • 49 Ohio St. 3d 224
  • 551 N.E.2d 989
  • 1990 Ohio LEXIS 116
Court
Ohio Supreme Court
Filed
Mar 14, 1990
Status
Published
Author
Holmes
On the bench
Brown, Douglas, Holmes, Moyer, Resnick, Sweeney, Wright
Cited by
54 cases

The opinion

Holmes, J.,

concurring in judgment. The board of trustees did not abuse its discretion in not finding relator to be permanently and totally disabled. The evidence is clear that relator is no longer able to be a fire fighter; however, I believe it also clear that there is ample evidence to support the board’s conclusion that relator can perform other jobs. Dr. Scheer, twice, and Dr. Goulder, once, found relator to be only partially disabled, and in view of relator’s work experience, the board properly determined him to be capable of engaging in any number of less strenuous occupations, as these physicians suggest. Therefore, the relator is not entitled to a writ of mandamus. However, I shall concur in the judgment of the majority here and agree to a remand which will allow the board to clarify its prior determination.

Moyer, C.J., concurs in the foregoing opinion.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.