 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Miller v. Premier Industrial Corp.3/16/2000
JUDGMENT: AFFIRMED.
Plaintiff-appellant, Ricky L. Miller, appeals the decision of the Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court granting summary judgment in favor of defendants-appellees, Premier Farnell Corp., D-A Lubricant Company, Inc. and Maintenance, Inc. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.
I.
On April 23, 1984, appellee Maintenance, Inc. hired appellant as a process operator/equipment technician at its production facility in Wooster, Ohio.1 The facility makes industrial sealants and lubricants. Appellant's duties as a process operator/equipment technician included production, packaging and warehousing functions in preparing products for shipment to customers and performing maintenance and repairs on plant equipment. One of the essential functions of appellant's position as process operator/equipment technician was to frequently lift loads of forty to sixty-five pounds. Appellant admitted that he frequently lifted such loads in his job as a process operator.
1Maintenance contends that it is an unincorporated division of Appellee D-A Lubricant. Although Maintenance does not explain the relationship between D-A Lubricant and Premier Farnell Corp., Maintenance contends that appellant has never been employed by Premier. Therefore, Maintenance contends that D-A Lubricant is the only proper party to this action. Appellant, on the other hand, contends that D-A Lubricant and Maintenance are subsidiaries of Premier and that the formal, legal boundaries of Defendant-Appellee Premier Industrial Corporation and its subsidiaries are wholly ignored in the daily operations of these entities. Appellant contends that this corporate incest obfuscate legal boundaries beyond fair or meaningful distinctions and therefore, he was employed by all three appellees.
Appellant originally injured his back in 1977 while working for another employer. After beginning his employment with Maintenance, appellant injured his back at work on four separate occasions. In 1987, appellant injured his back in a fall from a ladder. On April 20, 1995, he reinjured his back while moving bags of sand. He injured it again on July 28, 1995 while stacking pails of sealant, and again on January 5, 1996 when he was stacking pails of sealant. Appellant filed workers' compensation claims with respect to these incidents; the claim arising from the fall from the ladder was allowed but the other claims were denied.
Being apprised that appellant had a serious back problem, on January 12, 1996, Maintenance hired Bradley Johnson as a temporary laborer with no benefits to cover appellant's process operator/equipment technician position. In February 1996, Johnson began receiving health insurance and other full-time benefits from Maintenance. Johnson is younger than appellant.
On March 4, 1996, Charlotte Kawczk, a benefits administrator at Maintenance, sent appellant a letter, which was accompanied by a form that would allow appellant to apply for benefits under appellees' disability insurance. Appellant was eligible for sickness and accident benefits in the amount of half a week's pay for up to six months. Appellant never returned the forms and never applied for the benefits.
Appellant underwent back surgery on March 6, 1996. Three days later, while he was recuperating in the hospital, Bradley Eagle, one of appellant's co-workers, informed appellant that he was quitting his job as a telemarketer at Maintenance and encouraged appellant to apply for the telemarketing position that he was vacating. Appellant informed Robert Huebner, director of operations for Maintenance, that he was interested in the telemarketing position but was advised by Huebner in April
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Ohio Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|