From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mutters v. White Castle Sys., Inc.

Supreme Court of Ohio
Sep 24, 1997
683 N.E.2d 1095 (Ohio 1997)

Opinion

No. 97-774

Submitted June 25, 1997 —

Decided September 24, 1997.

APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Hamilton County, No. C-960524.

Becker, Reed, Tilton Hastings and Dennis A. Becker, for appellant.

Porter, Wright, Morris Arthur and Duane A. Boggs, for appellee.


The discretionary appeal is allowed.

The judgment of the court of appeals is reversed, and the cause is remanded to that court to apply Lewis v. Trimble (1997), 79 Ohio St.3d 231, 680 N.E.2d 1207.

MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER and COOK, JJ., concur.

LUNDBERG STRATTON, J., concurs separately.


I do not interpret this "remand" as an order to grant the claimant her award. Rather, I interpret it as an order to the court to apply the new standards in Lewis v. Trimble (1997), 79 Ohio St.3d 231, 680 N.E.2d 1207, to this fact pattern to determine whether claimant knew or should have known of her condition. However, I would also caution the trial court to factor in her doctor's apparent refusal to refer her for psychiatric care after she specifically requested it and the effect that refusal had upon her delay in diagnosis. It is possible that the doctor's refusal to refer claimant negated any threshold of the "knew or should have known" scienter on her part, given the trust one puts in one's own physician.


Summaries of

Mutters v. White Castle Sys., Inc.

Supreme Court of Ohio
Sep 24, 1997
683 N.E.2d 1095 (Ohio 1997)
Case details for

Mutters v. White Castle Sys., Inc.

Case Details

Full title:MUTTERS, APPELLANT, v. WHITE CASTLE SYSTEM, INC., APPELLEE, ET AL

Court:Supreme Court of Ohio

Date published: Sep 24, 1997

Citations

683 N.E.2d 1095 (Ohio 1997)
683 N.E.2d 1095

Citing Cases

Mutters v. White Castle

On remand in May 1998, we reversed the trial court's 1996 decision denying Mutters's amended claim and…