 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Keller v. Northwest Conduit Corporation9/26/2000
nc. (1990), 60 Ohio App.3d 14, 17. A determination that harm is substantially certain to occur often turns on the nature of the dangerous condition, prior accidents, and the employer's knowledge of the degree of risk involved. Taulbee v. Adience, Inc., BMI Div. (1997), 120 Ohio App.3d 11, 20-21.
Here, the exact danger which caused appellant's injury was electrocution due to electricity arcing from the transformer. While appellant's supervisor was aware that there was a danger of electrocution due to appellant coming in contact with energized electrical components, he did not know that dust thrown up by a jackhammer could conduct electricity or that electric current can arc from a live transformer. Moreover, appellee is in the business of installing electrical and telephone conduit, and it had worked around live electricity on numerous occasions over its fifteen-year history and none of its employees had ever before experienced an electrical accident. Without the knowledge that its employee was engaged in a procedure that could result in electricity arcing from the transformer, appellee cannot be charged with having "'actual knowledge of the exact dangers which ultimately caused'" injury. Sanek, supra, at 172. Accordingly, I would affirm the judgment of the trial court.
|