State ex rel. Eaton Corp. v. Lancaster
541 N.E.2d 64
Ohio
1989
Check Treatment

Concurrence Opinion

Douglas, J.,

concurring. I am pleased to see the majority of the court reverse itself and adopt the position *107set forth in my concurrence (joined in by Justice Sweeney) in the original decision in these cases as reported in State, ex rel. Eaton Corp., v. Lancaster (1988), 40 Ohio St. 3d 404, 416-417, 534 N.E. 2d 46, 58. Obviously, I concur in the majority opinion,

Sweeney, J., concurs in the foregoing concurring opinion.



Lead Opinion

Per Curiam.

On authority of State, ex rel. Peabody Coal Co., v. Indus. Comm. (1989), 44 Ohio St. 3d 104, 541 N.E. 2d 74, we hereby grant Surplus Fund reimbursement in case Nos. 87-622, 87-1887, 88-205 and 88-1312 for all amounts of temporary total compensation paid to the claimants herein subsequent to the respective findings of permanency.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., Sweeney, Holmes, Douglas, Wright, H. Brown and Resnick, JJ., concur.