Lisa Patterson successfully defends another Employer!
In the case State of Ohio ex rel. Julie Landers, Adm. of the Estate of Charles B. Landers v. Industrial Commission of Ohio and Crane 1 Services, Inc. the magistrate found the Ohio Industrial Commission properly found that a violation of a specific safety requirement (VSSR) had not been proven by the decedent’s estate because the application for VSSR did not cite to Ohio Admin. Code 4123:1-5-14(G) and, as a result, the arguments about Ohio Admin. Code 4123:1-5-14(G) had been waived. Additionally, if the lock-out/tag-out procedure which was supposed to be used would have been used, the defective alarms would not have functioned anyway, but were unnecessary because the crane could not have moved without power. See the attached case link below.
Congratulations Lisa for a job well done!
state-ex-rel-landers-v-indus-comm-of-ohio-case
Things Clients Want to Know:
Q. Why would I hire you as an hourly workers’ compensation attorney when I can have my third party administrator’s attorney cover my hearing for a one time flat fee?
A.
Every employer has multiple choices for representation at hearings. The benefit to having a lawyer attend a hearing are: 1) a lawyer may argue the law and 2) a lawyer may directly question the claimant.
Before I address the concerns, I want to emphasize that there are equally talented lawyers that practice both hourly and for a flat rate.
The issue for hearing is a good indicator of who you should select to represent you. If it is a hotly contested hearing, with factual and medical disputes, you would certainly want an hourly attorney that you have hired to do an extensive investigation of the facts and prepare a defense on your behalf. You have unlimited access to an hourly attorney, while typically you would have little or no contact with a flat rate attorney until the day or the day before the hearing. These same flat rate attorneys will not likely represent you in any post administrative court proceeding. It is extremely beneficial to have an attorney represent you throughout the administrative level through to court if that case continues. Their assessment and observations of the claimant at hearing, as well as detailed administrative work-up are a great predictor of the likelihood of success in later court proceedings.
Hearing issues such as Permanent Partial Hearings require little to no legal argument and certainly no cross examination would best be served by using a flat rate attorney.
The benefit of paying an hourly lawyer is that you are retaining a lawyer that not only is intimately knowledgeable about your business, but you are retaining that lawyer for the overall cost containment of the claim. An hourly lawyer can make recommendations as to what they foresee is the next step the claimant may take in a claim and predict what the overall exposure on the claim can be.
Flat rate lawyers take multiple hearings in one hour and will only represent you at that hearing. They typically will not make recommendations for future cost containment, or even what further documentation would be needed at future hearings.
The choice of what kind of representation is a business decision, that depends solely on the circumstances for your business and the specific facts of the claim at hand.
Lisa Patterson appointed to Ohio State Bar Association
Lisa Patterson has been appointed to the subcommittee for the OSBA Workers’ Compensation, BWC Law Liaison Subcommittee.
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.