State ex rel. Zollner v. Indus. Comm

In State ex rel. Zollner v. Indus. Comm. (1993), 66 Ohio St.3d 276, 1993 Ohio 49, 611 N.E.2d 830, the commission failed to list "dysthymic disorder" as an allowed condition in its order denying PTD compensation. The Zollner court stated: Claimant's first assertion is grounded in the omission of "dysthymic disorder" from the enumerated conditions in the permanent total disability order. Relying on State ex rel. Johnson v. Indus. Comm. (1988), 40 Ohio St.3d 339, claimant contends that the omission constitutes an abuse of discretion. Johnson, however, is distinguishable. There the commission's order did not list an allowed psychiatric condition among the allowed conditions. However, in Johnson, the evidence upon which the commission relied to deny permanent total disability related solely to the claimant's physical condition. These two factors led us to question whether the commission indeed considered all allowed conditions. The order was accordingly returned for clarification. In this case, permanent total disability denial was premised "particularly" on the reports of Dr. Steiman and Dr. Pritscher, who evaluated claimant's physical and psychiatric conditions respectively. Thus, the commission clearly took claimant's psychiatric condition into account in denying permanent total disability. Id. at 277-278.