Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Lamp v. J.A. Croson Co.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided March 4, 1996No. 94-814PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPfeifer, J.

The parties to this action contest whether a specific statutory requirement was violated when Lamp sustained his injuries. The parties do not contest whether Lamp was injured during the course of his employment. That issue was determined when Lamp’s workers’ compensation claim was allowed.

A few simple principles should guide our analysis of whether a specific safety requirement was violated. Specific safety requirements must be sufficiently specific to “plainly * * * apprise an employer of his legal obligation toward his employees.” State ex rel. Trydle v. Indus. Comm. (1972), 32 Ohio St.2d…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Burton v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1989
  2. State ex rel. Trydle v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1972
  3. State ex rel. Harris v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1984

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Precision Steel Servs., Inc. v. Indus. Comm. (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2015
  2. State ex rel. Byington Builders, Ltd. v. Indus. Comm. (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2018
  3. State ex rel. Parks v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  4. State ex rel. Devore Roofing & Painting v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2004
  5. State ex rel. Culver v. Indus. Comm.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2024

16 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