Intentional Tort Cases: Standards (Supreme Court)

Ohio Workers’ Compensation Decisions
(Supreme Court)

Intentional Tort: Standards

Select the case name to read the decision on the Ohio Supreme Court’s web site. For other issues, see our topic index to Ohio workers’ compensation decisions.

Conley v. Brown Corp. of Waverly Inc. (8/5/98)

Intentional tort suit is not limited to employee only. Intentional tort suit can be brought by a third party (such as an insurer who has been assigned the cause of action by the injured worker) or any other entity with the legal right to recover.

Vote: 5-0, 2 concur in judgment & syllabus only
Opinion by: Justice Douglas

Gibson v. Drainage Products, Inc. (5/8/02)

Evidence that employer’s actions and policies required employee to engage in dangerous task satisfies third requirement of three-part intentional tort test, and is sufficient to withstand a directed verdict motion. The employee is not required to show that employer expressly ordered employee to perform the dangerous task.

Vote: 5-2
Opinion by: Justice Douglas

Hannah v. Dayton Power & Light Co. (8/5/98)

Evidence presented issue of fact as to whether or not employer had committed intentional tort. Therefore, trial court improperly granted summary judgment in intentional tort suit.

Vote: 4-3
Opinion by: Justice Sweeney

Houdek v. ThyssenKrupp Materials N.A., Inc. (12/6/12)

An injured worker cannot recover for an employment intentional tort unless the employer deliberately intended to injure the worker, even if the evidence demonstrates that the employer could have avoided a tragic accident by taking necessary precautions.

Vote: 6-1
Opinion by: O’Donnell