Employer Knowledge Doesn't Equal Intent to Injure Sandblaster, Court Holds

ELYRIA, Ohio - Failure to fully implement safety procedures that would protect employees from silica exposure is not sufficient in itself to establish a common law intentional tort claim against an employer, a state appeals court has held. Adkins v. Atom Blasting & Finishing Inc., No. 07CA009109 (Ohio Ct. App., 9th Dist.).

Affirming summary judgment in a case brought by a former sandblaster, Ohio's Ninth District Court of Appeals ruled Sept. 28 that simply possessing a general understanding of silicosis risks inherent in their industry does not translate to an employer's intent to injure or harm employees.

"Appreciation of …