Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Brilliant Electric Sign Co. v. Industrial Commission

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided March 14, 1979No. 78-740PublishedCited by 39 opinions

1Per curiam

The sole issue raised by the instant cause is whether the Industrial Commission misconstrued Rule IC-3-05.03 (A) (5) so as to violate the command of Section 35 of Article II of the Ohio Constitution* that safety requirements be specific.

Rule IC-3-05.03 (A) (5) provides in pertinent part:

“When it is necessary to move or operate derricks, cranes, or any other type of hoisting apparatus or construction equipment within twelve (12) feet of an electrical conductor carrying 110 volts or more, the employer shall:
*53“(a) Arrange * * * to deenergize the conductor(s) or,
“(h) Arrange * * * to move the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Trydle v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1972
  2. Youngstown Club v. PorterfieldOhio Supreme Court · 1970
  3. State, Ex Rel. v. Ind. Com.Ohio Supreme Court · 1948
  4. State, Ex Rel. v. Indus. Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 1939
  5. State ex rel. Capital City Excavating Co. v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1978

3Cited by39 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Commercial Lovelace Motor Freight, Inc. v. LancasterOhio Supreme Court · 1986
  2. Mills-Jennings of Ohio, Inc. v. Department of Liquor ControlOhio Supreme Court · 1982
  3. McFee v. Nursing Care Management of America, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 2010
  4. In Re A.J.Ohio Supreme Court · 2016
  5. State ex rel. R. Bauer & Sons Roofing & Siding, Inc. v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1998

34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API