Lang v. Holly Hill Motel, Inc.

{¶ 26} Today, the majority holds that the open-and-obvious doctrine may be asserted as a defense to a claim of liability arising from a violation of the Ohio Basic Building Code. In reality, this is more than a defense — it is a complete bar to a claim of negligence.

{¶ 27} 2 Restatement of the Law 2d, Torts (1965), Section 343A(1), states, “A possessor of land is not liable to his invitees for physical harm caused to them by any activity or condition on the land whose danger is known or obvious to them, unless the possessor should anticipate the harm despite such knowledge or obviousness.”…