Ohio: Angry Worker Storms Off and Later Loses Claim for TTD Because He Abandoned Workforce

A divided Supreme Court of Ohio affirmed a finding of the state’s Industrial Commission that a worker was not entitled to TTD benefits because he had voluntarily abandoned the workforce when he quit his job on the same day that he reported to work with a note from his doctor restricting him to modified duty. When he returned, he became embroiled in an argument with his boss who had asked him to return the key to a company Jeep that the worker had loaned for some six months. Testimony indicated the worker asked if he had been fired and that the response of the boss was that he had not been fired, but that he should stop driving the Jeep. The worker left the job and subsequently filed a workers’ compensation claim. The majority found that the worker had failed to demonstrate that his loss of earnings was due to the industrial injury. He, therefore, did not meet that requirement for receiving TTD compensation. His voluntary departure was not causally related to the industrial injury.

Thomas A. Robinson, J.D., the Feature National Columnist for the LexisNexis Workers’ Compensation eNewsletter, is a leading commentator and expert on the law of workers’ compensation.

LexisNexis Online Subscribers: Citations below link to Lexis Advance. Bracketed citations link to lexis.com.

See State ex rel. Hildebrand v. Wingate Transp., Inc., 2015 Ohio 167, 2015 Ohio LEXIS 45 (Jan. 22, 2015) [2015 Ohio 167, 2015 Ohio LEXIS 45 (Jan. 22, 2015)]

See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 84.04 [84.04]

Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law.

For more information about LexisNexis products and solutions connect with us through our corporate site