State ex rel. Mayle v. Industrial Commission
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
Several key facts are unchallenged: (1) Apollon possessed the requisite safety equipment; (2) decedent had the opportunity to obtain that equipment from the Canton home office before leaving for the Bellefontaine job site; (3) decedent, before departing for Bellefontaine, did not request any safety equipment; (4) decedent, over the course of twenty years, consistently did not use safety belts/lifelines; and (5) industry-wide, the use of such equipment was avoided as being dangerous to the safety of tower painters.
Claimant contends that the availability of safety equipment at the Canton office…
2Cited by7 opinions
- State ex rel. Quality Tower Service, Inc. v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2000
- State ex rel. Avalotis Painting Co. v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2001
- State ex rel. Mayle v. Indus. Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 1999
- State ex rel. Quality Tower Serv., Inc. v. Indus. Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 2000
- State ex rel. Avalotis Painting Co. v. Indus Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 2001
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.