Ohio: Worker’s Estate May Not Sue Bureau of Workers’ Compensation Re Alleged Faulty Inspections

The estate of an Ohio employee who sustained fatal injuries in an extrusion press accident may not maintain a civil action against the state’s Bureau of Workers’ Compensation (“BWC”) for its alleged negligent provision of safety consulting services including inspections it allegedly made of the employer’s extrusion press operations. In its civil action, the estate alleged that the employer’s normal operating procedures required semi-automatic operation of its extrusion presses so as to prevent the machines from cycling when an employee was at a point of danger. The estate averred that the BWC had provided safety consulting services to the employer and that it had inspected, audited, and investigated the overall operation of the employer’s extrusion presses. The appellate court agreed with the trial court that the suit was barred by the public duty doctrine. The BWC had undertaken its duties pursuant to statutory authority and, based upon that authority, it was immune from suit.

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

LexisNexis Online Subscribers: Citations below link to Lexis Advance.

See Banks v. Ohio Bureau of Workers’ Comp., 2018-Ohio-5246, 2018 Ohio App. LEXIS 5559 (Dec. 27, 2018)

See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 100.03.

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

For a more detailed discussion of the case, see