Workers' compensation — Quantum of proof necessary to meet "some evidence" standard — One examining physician reported that claimant not permanently and totally disabled.
Per Curiam.
"* * * It is well established that mandamus will not lie where there is some evidence to support the finding of the Industrial Commission." State, ex rel. Anderson, v. Indus. Comm. (1979), 60 Ohio St.2d 106, 108 [24 O.O.3d 187]. Appellant contends that there was no evidence to support the commission's conclusion that she was not permanently and totally disabled. The record shows, however, that at least one examining physician reported that appellant was not permanently and totally disabled. This satisfies the quantum of proof necessary to meet this court's standard. The judgment of the court of appeals is accordingly affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
CELEBREZZE, C.J., W. BROWN, SWEENEY, LOCHER, HOLMES and J.P. CELEBREZZE, JJ., concur.
CLIFFORD F. BROWN, J., concurring.
I concur in the judgment, but need no help whatever from the vapid "some evidence" shibboleth to reach that result. See State, ex rel. Kilburn, v. Indus. Comm. (1982), 1 Ohio St.3d 103, dissenting opinion at 106. There is reliable, credible evidence — and that should be the yardstick — to support the commission's determination and to affirm the court of appeals.