State ex rel. Kolcinko v. Ohio Police & Fire Pension Fund
131 Ohio St. 3d 111
| Ohio | 2012Background
- Kolcinko sought mandamus to force OP&F to grant disability retirement for permanent, total disability from police duties (1991–2007).
- OP&F denied benefits; board’s final decision (Nov. 2009) upheld prior denial.
- Disability defined by R.C. 742.38(D)(1) and related provisions; “totally disabled” and “permanently disabled” meanings, weighing medical evidence.
- Court of Appeals denied writ; relied on Dr. Smarty’s psychiatric report supporting denial.
- Poa and Resnick reports concluded permanent disability but with lower impairment; board could credit Smarty over conflicting reports.
- Kolcinko waived physical-impairment arguments not raised in objections; judgment affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the board abused its discretion by relying on Smarty's report | Kolcinko contends Smarty was stale; other reports show disability | Board may weigh conflicting medical evidence and rely on Smarty | No abuse; evidence supports board's denial |
| Whether other medical opinions negate Smarty’s conclusions | Poa/Resnick show permanent disability contradicting Smarty | Board may accept Poa/Resnick but reject their conclusions | Board allowed reliance on Smarty; contrary evidence insufficient to prove abuse |
| Whether claimant waived the physical-impairment challenge | Appellant argued physical impairments but in reply brief | New argument in reply brief barred; waived error | Waiver; alternate argument lacking merit |
| Whether mandamus is appropriate to correct abuse in denial of disability | Writ needed to compel disability benefits | Discretionary denial not abuse; proper standard satisfied | Writ not warranted; no abuse shown |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Tindira v. Ohio Police & Fire Pension Fund, 130 Ohio St.3d 62 (2011-Ohio-4677) (mandamus available to correct abuse of discretion by board)
- Kinsey v. Bd. of Trustees of Police & Firemen’s Disability & Pension Fund of Ohio, 49 Ohio St.3d 224 (1990) (whether evidence supports disability findings)
- State ex rel. Spohn v. Indus. Comm., 115 Ohio St.3d 329 (2007-Ohio-5027) (presence of contrary evidence is immaterial if there is supporting evidence)
- State ex rel. Davis v. Pub. Emps. Retirement Bd., 111 Ohio St.3d 118 (2006-Ohio-5339) (standard for writ objections regarding oral argument)
- State ex rel. Am. Subcontractors Assn., Inc. v. Ohio State Univ., 129 Ohio St.3d 111 (2011-Ohio-2881) (new argument in reply brief forbidden)
- State ex rel. Schmidt v. School Emps. Retirement Sys., 100 Ohio St.3d 317 (2003-Ohio-6086) (objection specificity required; objections must be preserved)
- Evans v. Blackwell, 111 Ohio St.3d 1 (2006-Ohio-4334) (procedural preservation principles)