In State ex rel. Lacroix v. Indus. Comm., 10th Dist. No. 12 AP-931, 2013-Ohio–4881, The Commission denied the claimant’s PTD application, relying in part on a vocational report which failed to list all the claimant’s medical restrictions. The claimant challenged the Commission’s decision in mandamus action, arguing it was error to rely on the incomplete vocational report. The court of appeals denied the writ, emphasizing there is no requirement that a vocational report exhaustively list all the medical restrictions. More importantly, because the Commission is the vocational expert, the extent to which it relies on any vocational assessment, in whole, in part, or not at all is within the sole discretion of the Commission. Therefore, the court held any error in the report would not justify mandamus because the Commission could have rejected the vocational report completely and still denied PTD. Click here to read the case.