MTD Products, Inc. v. Robatin

Supreme Court of Ohio · Decided 1991-07-03

Cited by 135 later decision(s) in our corpus · see the citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

From the opinion

Herbert R. Brown, J. The sole issue before us is whether Robatin’s injury was received “in the course of, and arising out of,” his employment, thus allowing him to participate in workers’ compensation pursuant to R.C. Chapter 4123. For the following reasons we hold that Robatin is not entitled to workers’ compensation benefits and overrule Littlefield v. Pillsbury Co. *68</page…

Read the full opinion (source) ↗


Lexace provides legal information, not legal advice, and no attorney–client relationship is created. Citation figures are counts of later citing opinions in our corpus and may be incomplete; always read and Shepardize the full opinion before relying on it.