Lisa Patterson – Super Lawyer 2016
Lisa Patterson has been selected as a “Super Lawyer” in workers’ compensation for the 4th consecutive year! Congratulations Lisa!
See the attached video that outlines this achievement!
Lisa Patterson selected Super Lawyer 2016
Hoyle v. DTJ Enterprises
Claimant fell 14 feet from a ladder-jack. The ladder jack had bolts and pins to secure the ladder jacks to the ladders, but they were kept in the job superintendent’s office because they were too time consuming. (removal of safety device R.C. 2745.01(C))
Did Cincinnati Insurance Company have a duty to indemnify the employer in an intentional tort?
Intentional tort involves an act committed with the specific intent to injure or with the belief that injury is substantially certain to occur.
Court found that question of coverage here relied solely on a policy endorsement entitled “Employers liability coverage Form – Ohio.”
The policy excluded “liability for acts committed by or at the direction of an insured with the deliberate intent to injure.”
Court ruled that because liability for an employer intentional tort under R.C 2745.01 requires a finding that the employer acted with intention to injure an employee, we conclude that an insurance provision that excludes from coverage liability for insured’s act committed with deliberate intent precludes coverage for employer intentional torts.
State ex. Rel Penwell v. Indus. Comm.
Press Operator for 38 years injured when her left hand was crushed in a press. The press had two wrist cables for the operator and safety bar attached to the side of the press. Following the incident it’s important to note that the left safety bar was bent up and this would have taken immense force.
Defense: single malfunction
The press had operated for 38 years without a single incident.
The Court held that Safety regulations do not impose strict liability on employers, the purpose of a specific safety is to provide “reasonable” not absolute, safety for employees.
Practical Take Away:
- To be successful in this defense one must provide the timeline evidencing, claimant’s training on the machine, no other incidents involving the safety device, regular maintenance, safety meetings.
- It is comforting that the Court recognizes that an Employer cannot be an absolute insurer of an employee’s safety.
State ex rel. Viking Forge v. Perry
Claimant was on progressive discipline and was warned that his next infraction would lead to termination. Following the injury he was terminated.
Claimant testified that a co-worker was actually responsible for the infraction.
The IC accepted this testimony and awarded temporary total compensation.
The Court upheld the IC’s decision and specifically reinforced that the IC’s role is to assess the credibility of the evidence and no abuse of discretion was found.
Practical Take Away:
- Claimant’s can allege
- Employers must prove
- If there is a factual dispute, do the investigation, have your witnesses present at hearing.
Welcome to the firm, Cinamon S. Houston, Esq.
We are pleased to announce that we are adding an attorney to our practice, Cinamon S. Houston.
Ms. Houston trained to be a classical ballet dancer at North Carolina School of the Arts, obtained a Bachelor of Science Degree in Biochemistry from the University of Illinois at Chicago 1993, and graduated magna cum laude from the University of Dayton School of Law in 1997. She is licensed in Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky. She has worked in Dayton at several law firms representing plaintiffs, insurance defendants, employers and employees, and has served as a guardian ad litem in the Montgomery County Juvenile Court. She is the author of Ohio Personal Injury Litigation Manual, published by Lexis-Nexis since 2009.
Cinamon S. Houston, Esq.