Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

THE PENNSYLVANIA-OHIO POWER LIGHT CO. v. ORWICK.

Workmen's compensation — Appeal — Admissibility of evidence — Transcript of testimony at oral hearing and rehearing, including affidavits — Section 1465-91, General Code (109 O. L., 186) — Industrial Commission not bound by common law or statutory rules.

BY THE COURT.

It is urged that this judgment should be reversed because of the admission of evidence claimed to be incompetent before the Industrial Commission, and afterwards read to the jury from the transcript presented to the court of common pleas upon trial upon appeal, as appears by Exhibits G and H.

An examination of the record herein fails to disclose prejudicial error to have intervened in such form that this court is justified in reversing the judgment of the Court of Appeals, which affirmed the judgment of the common pleas court.

It is provided in Section 1465-91, General Code (109 Ohio Laws, 186), that "Such commission shall not be bound by the usual common law or statutory rules of evidence or by any technical or formal rules of procedure, other than as herein provided." In the light of such provision, and further because of the admissions shown in the record, together with the state of the record in which the claimed incompetent testimony is presented, we find no prejudicial error in the instant case. It therefore becomes our duty to affirm the judgment of the Court of Appeals.

Judgment affirmed.

MARSHALL, C.J., KINKADE, ROBINSON, JONES, MATTHIAS, DAY and ALLEN, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

POWER LIGHT CO. v. ORWICK
(Jun 18, 1930)