December 16, 2025

COLUMBUS – Columbus & Charleston Managing Partner Rob D'Anniballe and Pittsburgh Associate Sydney Croft secured a complete defense victory for an industrial services provider in an extensive Ohio Workers' Compensation case. The final judicial action secured a zero-dollar award of substantial Temporary Total Disability (TTD) benefits sought by the claimant since the date of the injury.

Overview of the Case

The case involved an industrial services provider employer in Ohio (a monopolistic state for workers' compensation). The claimant's injury claim was allowed for several severe conditions but was disallowed for numerous other significant conditions, including multiple disc herniations and major depression. Throughout the extensive administrative and judicial proceedings, the claimant sought TTD benefits from the date of the claim (05/30/2018) through the present.

Key Difference-Makers

• Rob D'Anniballe – Managing Partner, Columbus & Charleston Hubs
• Sydney Croft – Associate, Pittsburgh Hub 

Administrative Support

• Jessica Mentzer – Paralegal

Claims Made Against Our Client

The primary claim being litigated was the claimant's request for continuous Temporary Total Disability (TTD) indemnity payments from May 2018 forward, as certified by his treating physician. This request was argued despite a complex injury allowance: while the claim was allowed for severe conditions such as a high pressure blast injury (with complex abrasion/laceration and embedded foreign bodies in the right chin and neck), cervical sprain, cervical strain, and head contusion, the claimant simultaneously and consistently litigated numerous disallowed severe conditions, including major depression, sprains/contusions to the left knee and lumbar spine, and multiple disc herniations and bulges across both the lumbar (L2-S1) and cervical (C3-C7) spine.

Defense Strategy

QPWB’s defense strategy was focused on aggressive, best-practices litigation throughout the entire administrative and judicial process. The team aggressively employed the voluntary abandonment and suitable employment defenses under Ohio law, arguing that the claimant refused to return to light duty work that met the restrictions provided by their own treating physician.

The decisive moment came when the defense successfully argued to the Court of Appeals and the Ohio Supreme Court that the denial of benefits should be affirmed under the suitable employment doctrine, despite administrative officers incorrectly labeling the principle as "voluntary abandonment." The defense emphasized the substance of the factual findings over the mislabeled legal theory.

Impact on Final Outcome

By aggressively defending each of the numerous issues raised by the claimant, D’Anniballe and Croft successfully minimized financial exposure. The defense's strategic focus was validated when the appellate courts rejected the claimant's attempt to rely on the administrative hearing officers' mislabeling of the legal theory. The resulting judicial affirmation of the denial of TTD benefits preserves the minimal amount of medical benefits and indemnity payments disbursed, protecting the employer's premiums and cash flow, and essentially foreclosing any future TTD action.

Unique Aspect of this Case

The most unique aspect is the extensive and comprehensive nature of the litigation. The claimant aggressively raised every issue possible in seeking every benefit possible under Ohio law, both administratively and judicially, making the administrative record and related court action a rare and comprehensive case study of Ohio workers' compensation defense.

Predicting the Future

This victory preserves QPWB's reputation for having a high level of experience and expertise in every aspect that can be raised by a claimant under Ohio Workers' Compensation law. The successful defense of the decision based on the substantive doctrine of suitable employment over the administrative mislabeling reinforces the firm's ability to limit financial exposure in complex, high-stakes administrative litigation.

Key Actions in This Case

• Substance Over Form: Convinced appellate courts to affirm a ruling based on the correct legal principle (suitable employment) despite the incorrect legal label used by the lower tribunal
• Aggressive Defense: Successfully defended against TTD benefits by consistently using the voluntary abandonment and suitable employment defenses

About QPWB

Quintairos, Prieto, Wood & Boyer, P.A. is one of the fastest growing law firms in the United States providing a different focus on what it means to provide responsive service to clients and team members. With a national presence of 55 offices and a comprehensive scope of over 130 practice areas, QPWB delivers legal representation in litigation, regulatory, and corporate matters to a diverse range of industries. This scope and rapid expansion has attracted unique legal talent from all different backgrounds and experiences which has made them the largest minority-owned law firm in the country.