State ex rel. General Motors Corp. v. Industrial Commission (58 Ohio St. 2d 361, 1979)

Per Curiam.

Appellant alleges that the medical reports by Doctors Eessler and Zaas were “surreptitiously filed” with the commission and that it did not have a reasonable chance to read the reports before the commission hearing held November 5, 1974. As such, appellant contends that the commission grossly abused its discretion in denying its motion for discovery filed on November 6,1974.

In State, ex rel. General Motors Corp., v. Indus. Comm. (1975), 42 Ohio St. 2d 278, 283, this court held: “* * * where the record contains evidence which supports the commission’s factual findings, this