Ellis v. Buehrer
2017 Ohio 5516
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- David Ellis fell from a dump truck on July 3, 2011, sought treatment, then died at home on July 8, 2011; coroner listed hypertensive cardiovascular disease as immediate cause and "natural" as manner of death.
- Deborah Ellis (widow) applied for death benefits under David’s existing BWC claim; district and staff hearing officers denied benefits and the Industrial Commission affirmed.
- Deborah filed an R.C. 313.19 challenge in Clermont County seeking to change the coroner’s cause/manner/mode findings; the trial court denied relief after considering depositions and exhibits, and the Twelfth District affirmed.
- Deborah then refiled her R.C. 4123.59 death-benefits appeal in Hamilton County; defendants moved for summary judgment based on collateral estoppel, relying on the prior R.C. 313.19 judgment.
- The Hamilton County court granted summary judgment for the Administrator and Evans Transport; the First District Court of Appeals affirmed, holding collateral estoppel barred relitigation of whether the work injury proximately contributed to death.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether collateral estoppel bars Ellis’s R.C. 4123.59 claim | Ellis: R.C. 313.19 resolved only coroner’s physical cause; it did not decide whether the workplace injury was the direct and proximate cause of death | Defendants: The R.C. 313.19 proceeding fully litigated cause/manner/mode; issue preclusion prevents relitigation | Held: Collateral estoppel applies; elements met and R.C. 4123.59 claim precluded |
| Whether R.C. 313.19 is a "special statutory proceeding" that limits preclusion | Ellis: Because R.C. 313.19 is special, its scope is limited to ordering a coroner’s change, not deciding proximate causation for benefits | Defendants: The statute’s challenge to cause/manner/mode includes proximate causation and was fully litigated | Held: Even as a special statutory proceeding, the R.C. 313.19 action fully adjudicated the issues; preclusion applies |
| Whether summary judgment was improper for failing to view evidence in Ellis’s favor | Ellis: Trial court failed to construe disputed evidence and experts in her favor | Defendants: No genuine issue of material fact remains because prior final judgment resolved the critical issue | Held: Summary judgment proper—when evidence is viewed in Ellis’s favor collateral estoppel still requires judgment for defendants |
Key Cases Cited
- McKee v. Elec. Auto-Lite Co., 168 Ohio St. 77 (1958) (test for compensability when a preexisting condition is accelerated by work injury)
- Vargo v. Travelers Ins. Co., 34 Ohio St.3d 27 (1987) (coroner’s determination creates a rebuttable presumption absent competent, credible contrary evidence)
- Grafton v. Ohio Edison Co., 77 Ohio St.3d 102 (1996) (summary-judgment standard; de novo review)
- Mitchell v. Internatl. Flavors & Fragrances, Inc., 179 Ohio App.3d 365 (2008) (elements for collateral estoppel in Ohio appellate context)
- Perez v. Cleveland, 78 Ohio St.3d 376 (1997) (R.C. 313.19 is a special statutory civil proceeding)
- State ex rel. Howard v. Ferreri, 70 Ohio St.3d 587 (1994) (application of Civ.R. 56 and summary-judgment principles)
- State ex rel. Blair v. Balraj, 69 Ohio St.3d 310 (1994) (R.C. 313.19 challenge not limited to physiological mechanism; includes manner and circumstances of death)