State ex rel. Cassens Corp. v. Indus. Comm.
Citations
- 2022 Ohio 2936
Syllabus
The commission abused its discretion in concluding the Chrysler outdoor yard constituted a workshop within the meaning of Ohio Adm.Code Chapter 4123:1-5, and, therefore, Cassens cannot be found to have committed a VSSR pursuant to Ohio Adm.Code 4123:1-5-13(C)(4). We sustain Cassens' fourth objection to the magistrate's decision, rendering moot its first, second, and third objections to the magistrate's decision, and we grant Cassens' request for a writ of mandamus.
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- “[w]hen the court draws conclusions of law, our review is plenary and we must decide whether those conclusions are legally and logically correct”
- ‘‘Law days are ineffective while the appeal period is pending. To conclude otherwise would be tantamount to depriving a party of judicial review and, therefore, of due process of law.’’
- Law days are ineffective while the appeal period is pending. To conclude otherwise would be tantamount to depriving a party of judicial review and, therefore, of due process of law.
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Luper Schuster
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.