Legal Opinion

Stillo v. Rubbermaid

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided April 5, 1990No. Case No. 56612Published

1Opinion of the CourtDyke, J.

Plaintiffs-appellants, the estate of Grace I. Berry and Carol Stillo, alleged that defendant acted intentionally in causing their respective resulting illnesses and, in the case of Grace I. Berry, death.

Defendant-appellee Rubbermaid, Inc., filed a motion for summary judgment arguing that no material issues of fact exist in regard to plaintiffs' ability to meet the requisites for establishing an employer intentional tort as set forth in Van Fossen v. Babcock & Wilcox Co. (1988), 36 Ohio St. 3d 100.

Plaintiffs opposed defendant's motion for summary judgmet. On October 3, 1988, the trial court,…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Temple v. Wean United, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Harless v. Willis Day Warehousing Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1978
  3. Van Fossen v. Babcock & Wilcox Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1988
  4. Bostic v. ConnorOhio Supreme Court · 1988
  5. Blankenship v. Cincinnati Milacron Chemicals, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1982

3 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