State Ex Rel. Donohoe v. Industrial Commission, 130 Ohio St. 3d 390

Donohoe died from injuries in a construction-site accident; widow sought additional workers’ compensation benefits for alleged VSSR violations.
Kenny Huston Company worked masonry on a military base; decedent assisted two masons on a scaffold/work platform about 13 feet high.
Adjacent scaffold lacked guardrails; it was being dismantled and not part of the south parapet work area.
Disputed evidence: whether decedent fell from the scaffold’s cross-braces (12+ feet) or from an unguarded higher platform, or from a lower fall (1–3 feet) that could change which VSSRs apply.
SHO denied the VSSR claim, noting no eyewitnesses to the fall and stating the widow could not prove a specific safety requirement was violated.
Court of Appeals vacated the SHO’s order and remanded for clarification, holding that lack of eyewitnesses does not bar review of all evidence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Can a VSSR be proven without eyewitness testimony?	Donohoe argues eyewitnesses are not legally required; inferences may be drawn from the evidence.	Huston contends absence of eyewitnesses defeats proof of a VSSR and the specific violation.	VSSR proof may be supported without eyewitnesses; lack does not defeat mitigation of evidence.
Was the SHO's order an abuse of discretion based on reliance on lack of eyewitnesses?	Order suggested failure to review evidence due to missing witnesses; too ambiguous to resolve.	Order reflected evaluation of evidence as given; no error in considering testimony limitations.	The circuit properly vacated for clarification; SHO abused discretion by overemphasizing eyewitness absence.
Whether the commission may draw reasonable inferences and review all evidence in VSSR claims.	The commission should infer from the total record even without direct eyewitnesses.	No explicit contention beyond the SHO’s findings; seeks to limit reliance on non-eyewitness evidence.	Court affirms that the commission may draw reasonable inferences and rely on the record; not bound to eyewitness presence.

State ex rel. Supreme Bumpers, Inc. v. Indus. Comm., 98 Ohio St.3d 134 (2002-Ohio-7089) (SHO may draw inferences; direct evidence not required for VSSR)