Skip to main content

State ex rel. McKee v. Union Metal Corp. (Slip Opinion)

OhioJune 29, 2017No. 2016-0509Cited 12 times
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
O'Connor, O'Donnell, Kennedy, French, O'Neill, Fischer, Dewine
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
appeal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Wrongful Termination

Outcome

The Ohio Supreme Court affirmed the denial of McKee's writ of mandamus seeking permanent total disability benefits, finding that the Industrial Commission's determination that McKee voluntarily abandoned the workforce for reasons unrelated to his workplace injury was supported by evidence in the record.

Excerpt

Workers' compensation-Permanent total disability-Voluntary abandonment of workforce-Denial of writ of mandamus affirmed.

What This Ruling Means

**What the Case Was About** McKee, a worker at Union Metal Corporation, suffered a workplace injury and applied for permanent total disability benefits through Ohio's workers' compensation system. The state's Industrial Commission denied his claim, ruling that he had voluntarily left the workforce for reasons unrelated to his work injury. McKee challenged this decision in court, asking the Ohio Supreme Court to order the commission to approve his benefits. **What the Court Decided** The Ohio Supreme Court sided against McKee and upheld the Industrial Commission's denial of benefits. The court found that there was sufficient evidence supporting the commission's conclusion that McKee had voluntarily abandoned his job for reasons that had nothing to do with his workplace injury. **Why This Matters for Workers** This ruling reinforces that workers seeking permanent total disability benefits must prove their inability to work is directly caused by their workplace injury. If workers leave their jobs for other personal reasons—such as family issues, relocation, or career changes—they may lose their right to these benefits, even if they have a legitimate work injury. Workers should carefully document how their injuries prevent them from working and avoid actions that could be seen as voluntarily leaving the workforce.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.