Bechtel v. Multi-Cast Corp.

Trial Court No. 22 CV 0085

Kevin J. Boissoneault and Jonathan M. Ashton, for appellants.

Mark S. Barnes and Robert L. Solt, for appellees.

DECISION AND JUDGMENT

DUHART, J.

{¶ 1} This is an appeal from a judgment by the Fulton County Common Pleas granting summary judgment in favor of appellee Multi-Cast, LLC ("MCL"). For the reasons that follow, the trial court's judgment is affirmed.

Statement of the Case

{¶ 2} On June 22, 2018, appellants Kevin Bechtel and Debra Bechtel ("appellants") filed a lawsuit in the trial court seeking damages for injuries sustained by Kevin Bechtel (Bechtel"), on June 24, 2016, in the course of and arising out of his employment with Multi Cast LLC ("MCL"). The court docketed the case as No. 18-CV-00105. Appellants' complaint alleged that MCL committed an employer intentional tort under R.C. 2745.01(A) and (C) by: 1) knowingly allowing a dangerous work situation; 2) knowingly, intentionally, and deliberately requiring Bechtel to work on a saw lacking "necessary equipment safety guards of anti-kickback devices and spreader;" 3) knowingly, intentionally, and deliberately requiring Bechtel to work on the aforementioned saw despite knowing serious injury was substantially certain to occur; and 4) knowingly, intentionally, and deliberately failing to adequately train Bechtel. In the alternative, appellants alleged that Bechtel's injury resulted from MCL's negligence. MCL answered appellants' complaint, and the case proceeded according to the trial court's scheduling order.

{¶ 3} MCL moved the court for summary judgment on August 22, 2019, after the parties conducted extensive discovery. On January 10, 2020, the trial court denied the motion for summary judgment on the ground that "numerous material and relevant facts [were] still in dispute."

{¶ 4} On April 12, 2021, MCL moved the court to reconsider its summary judgment decision. On June 2, 2021, the court scheduled a hearing on the motion for

reconsideration, which was to occur on June 21, 2021. On June 22, 2021, appellants voluntarily dismissed their complaint.

{¶ 5} On June 16, 2022, appellants refiled their complaint, in case No. 22-CV-0085, making the same allegations that were set forth in the original complaint. MCL timely answered. On October 5, 2022, appellants moved to transfer the file from case No. 18-CV-00105 to the present case, which motion MCL opposed. On November 1, 2022, the court granted appellants' motion, thereby transferring all documents from case No. 18-CV-00105 to the present case. Neither party conducted any additional discovery, and discovery closed on June 19, 2023, according to the court's February 21, 2023, order.

{¶ 6} On August 14, 2023, MCL filed its motion for summary judgment based on the record documents filed in case No. 18-CV-00105, which included depositions of Bechtel; former floor operation manager and current area supervisor Jeffrey Williams; former MCL general manager Michael Schnipke; and former MCL human resource manager Nicole Verity. Also contained in the record was the August 11, 2023 affidavit of William Martin, who is the Direct and Vice Chairman of Evan Industries, which company is the sole shareholder of MCL. On or about September 11, 2023, appellants filed a memorandum in opposition to MCL's summary judgment motion. Appellants supported their memorandum in opposition with a May 23, 2017, report of the Bureau of Workers' Compensation Safety Violations Investigation Unit (SVIU); a transcript of a hearing before the Industrial Commission of Ohio on Bechtel's application for a Violation of a Specific Safety Requirement (VSSR); the Industrial Commission's order

pertaining to Bechtel's VSSR application; copies of two owner's manuals regarding the table saw at issue; and a September 8, 2023, affidavit of appellants' expert, Gerald Rennell. On October 9, 2023, MCL filed its reply memorandum.

{¶ 7} On October 26, 2023, the trial court granted MCL's motion for summary judgment. Appellants timely appealed the trial court's decision.

Statement of the Facts

{¶ 8} The facts of this case, viewed in a light most favorable to appellants, are as follows. Multi-Cast Corporation ("MCC") is solely owned by four individual shareholders: Michael D. Jewell, Robert C. Stewart, Timothy E. Moxim, and Randall E. Vonier. In 2015, MCC defaulted on its obligations to its senior secured lenders, causing it to cease operations and to surrender its assets to PNC Bank.

{¶ 9} On March 2, 2015, MCL was incorporated as a Michigan limited liability company duly organized and authorized to do business in the state of Ohio. MCL's sole shareholder is Evans Industries. On March 9, 2015, MCL purchased the assets of MCC for cash. Prior to the asset sale, MCL and MCC had no ongoing business relationship. The purchase agreement provides that MCL expressly disclaims any and all potential liabilities of MCC. The purchase was for cash and involved no transfer of stock. Upon completion of the asset purchase, MCL provided new corporate management and directors. Although no employee of MCC became an officer or director of MCL, many of MCC's employees - including management-level employees - remained with the

business and became employees of MCL. No past owner of MCC is involved in any way with the business of MCL.

{¶ 10} MCL is a manufacturer of aluminum castings. As part of the assets purchased by MCO from MCC on March 9, 2015, MCL acquired a 1943 Delta Model 1450 10" Tilting Arbor Unisaw ("table saw"), which had been in use since the mid-1940s. The instruction manual for the machine contains "Instructions for Adjusting and Operating the No. 1450 Tilting Arbor Saw," together with "Operating and Maintenance Instructions for 10" Circular Saw Guards." The instructions related to the circular saw guards explain that

[n]o one saw guard is suitable for all types of work, consequently it is important that a customer obtain that type of guard best suited for his particular work. The Unisaw Tilting Arbor Circular Saw was designed with that end in view, therefore, provisions were made for mounting splitters, splitter guards, basket swing guard, solid hood guard, and combinations of the above.

(Emphasis added.) These instructions then go on to describe "the different units available."

{¶ 11} In 2013, MCC purchased and installed a Biesemeyer Blade Guard System on the table saw. According to the Biesemeyer Blade Guard System manual, the system came with a blade guard and a splitter with an anti-kickback device that attached to the saw behind the blade guard.

{¶ 12} Over the years, employees of MCC -- and then MCL -- would at times take the splitter/spreader and anti-kickback device off the table saw, believing that the device

made the operation of the table saw more dangerous and less efficient. Bechtel testified that he never saw a spreader or anti-kickback device on the MCL table saw.

{¶ 13} MCL hired Bechtel in mid-April 2016 to work in maintenance and repair. Bechtel worked in maintenance and repair for most of his life and learned how to safely operate table saws while attending vocational school at Macomber High School. Bechtel bought his own table saw in 1991 and has had a woodworking shop at his home containing a number of power saws, including a table saw, for the past four decades.

{¶ 14} On June 16, 2016, Bechtel received training from then-human resource manager Nicole Verity on MCL's Personal Protective Equipment Policy. The training material presented by Verity on June 16, 2016, provides that gloves are required only in "the melt room, finishing, welding, and pouring tasks."

{¶ 15} On June 23, 2016, Bechtel operated the table saw -- which was equipped with a blade guard but without a splitter/spreader or anti-kickback device -- for about an hour, cutting strips of lightweight insulation board. The next day, Bechtel continued cutting the 3-foot-long insulation boards into 2-inch-wide strips. As he was cutting the last two-inch-wide strip on the insulation board, with approximately 1.5 inches left to the edge of the board, the 1.5-inch strip began to chatter. To prevent the chattering, Bechtel placed his left hand on the saw's table behind the blade with his left index finger up against the edge of the 1.5-inch strip of board, and shortly thereafter he made contact with the saw blade, amputating his left index finger and injuring his left middle finger.

{¶ 16} Bechtel was wearing gloves at the time of his accident. He was aware of the danger of using gloves while operating a table saw because he knew that loose clothing could get caught and pulled into the saw blade. Bechtel recalls very little about how his injury occurred. He acknowledges that he should not have been wearing gloves while operating the table saw. When asked what could have been done to prevent this injury, Bechtel stated on a portion of the injury report, "Don't wear gloves is all I can think of."

{¶ 17} On the date of the injury, MCL was a complying state fund employer under Ohio's workers' compensation law, paying premiums to the Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation. Bechtel filed a workers' compensation claim in connection with the June 24, 2016 injury, and was paid compensation and medical benefits to which he was entitled under Ohio's workers' compensation law.

{¶ 18} In an order dated February 2, 2018, a hearing officer granted Bechtel's VSSR application after determining: 1) that MCL violated Ohio Admin. Code Sections 4123:1-5-08(D)(1)(b) and (c), because the saw did not have an anti-kickback or spreader device in place at the time of Bechtel's injury; and 2) that use of an anti-kickback or spreader device would have prevented Bechtel's...