State ex rel. Hina v. Industrial Commission

{¶ 1} Appellee, David E. Hina, was injured by one of appellant Anchor Glass Container Corporation’s (“Anchor’s”) milling machines, the Cinova 80. He has alleged that his injury is a result of Anchor’s violation of a specific safety requirement (“VSSR”). Appellant Industrial Commission of Ohio determined that the Cinova 80 satisfied the applicable specific safety requirements. The *5Court of Appeals for Franklin County, however, ruled that the machine did not satisfy former Ohio Adm.Code 4121:l-5-05(D)(l) and ordered the commission to determine whether the deficiency proximately caused Hina’s…