In a case of first impression, a divided Ohio Supreme Court last week ruled that an employer can defend itself from liability for an enhanced award of benefits based on a violation of a specific safety requirement if it would have been impossible to comply.
The court also said a worker’s suggestion that there may have been a way to comply with the safety requirement will not prevent the employer from successfully establishing an impossibility defense if it turns out the worker was wrong.
The case was State ex rel. Jackson Tube Service v. Industrial Commission, No. 2017-0790.
...
Related Articles
Comments