Pixley v. Pro-Pak Industries, Inc. (Slip Opinion)
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtO’Donnell, J.
{¶ 1} Pro-Pak Industries, Inc., and Toledo L & L Realty Company appeal from a judgment of the Sixth District Court of Appeals that reversed summary judgment granted by the trial court in their favor in connection with Phillip Pixley’s intentional tort claim arising from injuries he sustained when struck by a transfer car in the course and scope of his employment at Pro-Pak.
{¶ 2} Pursuant to R.C. 2745.01, an intentional tort claim requires a demonstration of the employer’s intent to cause injury to an employee. And more specifically, R.C. 2745.01(C) provides a rebuttable presumption that the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Houdek v. ThyssenKrupp Materials N.A., Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 2012
- Hewitt v. L.E. Myers Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 2012
3Cited by9 opinions
- The State Ex Rel. Ford v. Ruehlman, JudgeOhio Supreme Court · 2016
- Breitenbach v. Double Z Constr. Co., L.L.C.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2016
- Turner v. Dimex, L.L.C.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2019
- Partin v. C.S. White Industries, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2016
- Below v. Cargill, IncorporatedDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2025
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.