Benford v. Dept. of Rehab. & Corr.

Citations

• 2019 Ohio 2619

Syllabus

Negligence negligent supervision duty to exercise reasonable care magistrate Civ.R. 53. Plaintiff inmate cut his fingers while operating a food slicer as part of a work assignment. Plaintiff claimed that (1) he was not trained to use the slicer, (2) defendant's agent did not properly supervise his use of it, and (3) the slicer was defective or the safety guard was removed. The court found that plaintiff had been trained to use the slicer. Plaintiff acknowledged that he completed paperwork indicating that he had been trained and that another inmate showed him how to use the slicer. Furthermore, an employee testified credibly that she had trained plaintiff. The court found that plaintiff's own testimony that a supervisor was standing within a couple of feet from him undermined his claim that he was not properly supervised. Plaintiff did not establish that the safety guard was removed on the day of the accident. Plaintiff himself admitted that he did not know if the safety guard was present on the day of the accident, and other evidence indicated that the guard may have been permanent. Lastly, plaintiff failed to identify any alleged defects in the slicer or prove that defendant knew or should have known that the slicer was defective before the time of his injury. Therefore, the sole cause of the accident was plaintiff's own failure to keep his hands free of the blade. The magistrate recommended that judgment be entered in favor of defendant.