Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Ohio: Absence of Hook Latch on Hoisting Crane Not a Violation of Specific Safety Requirement

December 04, 2015 (1 min read)

The Ohio Industrial Commission abused its discretion when it determined that an employer violated the safety regulations in Ohio Adm. Code 4123:1–5–14(G)(1) by failing to repair or replace a crane hook that was missing a safety latch and those in Ohio Adm. Code 4123:1–5–15(B) by failing to remove the crane from service due to the missing latch, proximately causing injury to an employee, held a divided state appellate court. The court said that neither rule set forth a specific safety requirement that required the employer to employ a latch or pull equipment from service any hoist that did not have such a latch. While the employer was liable for the employee’s injuries, it was not liable for a separate and distinct award for the alleged violation.

Thomas A. Robinson, J.D., the Feature National Columnist for the LexisNexis Workers’ Compensation eNewsletter, is the co-author of Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law (LexisNexis).

LexisNexis Online Subscribers: Citations below link to Lexis Advance. Bracketed citations link to

See State ex rel. Precision Steel Servs., Inc. v. Industrial Comm’n, 2015-Ohio–4798, 2015 Ohio LEXIS 3135 (Nov. 24, 2015) [2015-Ohio–4798, 2015 Ohio LEXIS 3135 (Nov. 24, 2015)]

See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 105.06 [105.06]

Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law.