Norgard v. Brush Wellman, Inc.
Case Details
- Judge(s)
- Francis E. Sweeney, Sr., J.
- Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
- Published
- Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
- appeal
Related Laws
No specific laws identified for this ruling.
Outcome
The Ohio Supreme Court reversed the lower courts' grant of summary judgment based on statute of limitations, holding that the statute of limitations for employer intentional tort claims accrues when the employee discovers both the injury and the employer's wrongful conduct, not merely the injury itself. The case was remanded for trial.
Excerpt
Employer and employee—Intentional tort—Cause of action based upon an employer intentional tort accrues, when.
What This Ruling Means
This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.
Similar Rulings
Commission did not err awarding temporary total disability and medical benefits for compensable injury by accident arising out of employment; credible evidence supports finding Rose as employer had power to control appellee as employee, rather than independent contractor; injury arose out of employment as cause of accident was condition peculiar to workplace
Workers' compensation—Temporary-total-disability compensation—R.C. 4123.56—Employee who had already been terminated for violation of employment policies before his shoulder surgery was not "unable to work" as "direct result of an impairment arising from an injury or occupational disease" under plain language of R.C. 4123.56(F) and thus was not entitled to receive temporary-total-disability compensation—Court of appeals' judgment reversed and writ granted.
Quo warranto—Mandamus—Appellants failed to challenge court of appeals' judgment dismissing their quo warranto claim on basis of laches and therefore waived that argument—Court of appeals' determination that appellants could not establish entitlement to city-council offices or that appellees were unlawfully holding the positions affirmed—Court of appeals' denial of request for writ of mandamus ordering continued payment of salaries and benefits as moot affirmed.
Browse Related
Facing something similar at work?
Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.
This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.