Summary
The Ohio Supreme Court affirmed the denial of a writ of mandamus sought by Nick Strimbu, Inc. in a workers’ compensation dispute. The court held that the Industrial Commission reasonably found that the claimant’s omission of a former employer from his employment application was inadvertent rather than an intentional falsification, and therefore his discharge did not constitute voluntary abandonment barring temporary total disability compensation.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Marshall's discharge for omitting a prior employer from his employment application constituted a voluntary abandonment of his former position that barred temporary total disability compensation.
- Whether the Industrial Commission abused its discretion by finding that Marshall did not deliberately falsify his employment application and therefore had not voluntarily abandoned his employment.
Holdings
- A termination may constitute voluntary abandonment only when it is generated by the claimant's violation of a written work rule or policy that clearly defines the prohibited conduct, identifies it as a dischargeable offense, and was known or should have been known to the employee. An omission from an employment application must be deliberate and motivated by an intent to deceive to constitute falsification.
- The Industrial Commission has exclusive responsibility for determining evidentiary weight and credibility, and a court will not find an abuse of discretion when the Commission's determination is supported by evidence.
Key quotations
“Specifically, a voluntary termination is one “generated by the claimant’s violation of a written work rule or policy that (1) clearly defined the prohibited conduct, (2) had been previously identified by the employer as a dischargeable offense, and (3) was known or should have been known to the employee.”” (¶ 8)
“The commission is exclusively responsible for determining evidentiary weight and credibility.” (¶ 10)
Factual background
Willie E. Marshall Jr. was hired as a truck driver by Nick Strimbu, Inc. after completing an employment application requiring him to list his employers for the preceding ten years. After Marshall was injured in a truck accident and his workers' compensation claim was allowed, Strimbu discovered that he had omitted PI&I Motor Express from the employment history. Strimbu discharged Marshall for allegedly falsifying the application, but Marshall testified that the omission was inadvertent and resulted from forgetting the prior employer.
Procedural history
Marshall's workers' compensation claim was allowed after he was injured in a truck accident, and he sought temporary total disability compensation. After Strimbu discharged him for allegedly falsifying his employment application, the Industrial Commission found that he had not voluntarily abandoned his employment because the omission of a prior employer was inadvertent and did not establish intent to deceive. The Franklin County Court of Appeals denied Strimbu's mandamus action, and the Supreme Court of Ohio affirmed.