DocketNumber: No. 98AP-1091.
Judges: BRYANT, J.
Filed Date: 8/26/1999
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 4/18/2021
Pursuant to Civ.R. 53 and Section M, Loc.R. 12 of the Tenth Appellate District, this matter was referred to a magistrate who issued a decision, including findings of fact and conclusions of law. In her decision the magistrate concluded that the commission's analysis of the non-medical factors is inadequate to comply with State ex rel. Noll v. Indus. Comm. (1991),
Relator has filed an objection to the magistrate's decision, contending that a full writ of mandamus should be issued pursuant to State ex rel. Gay v. Mihm (1994),
Following independent review pursuant to Civ.R. 53, we find the magistrate has properly determined the pertinent facts and applied the salient law to them with the following amplification. Although the staff hearing officer relied upon the vocational report of Julie Morrissey, the staff hearing officer does not attempt to adopt the vocational report, much less the analysis employed in it. As a result, the staff hearing officer's order is conclusory with respect to the positions which relator may be capable of performing, lacking any analysis to support the conclusions. As the magistrate noted, simply relying on the vocational report is not a substitute for an independent explanation regarding the non-medical factors. State ex rel. Hayesv. Indus. Comm. (1997),
Objection overruled; limited writ granted.
PETREE and KENNEDY, JJ., concur.