About Us
Representative Matters
Citations to the Law
Employment Law
Health Care
Legal Resources
dicta inter alia
Privacy Policy
Contact Information

This information is provided for educational and guidance purposes only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice nor to substitute the need for legal counsel. Entire contents Copyright 2006. Martin James O'Connell.


The Employment Law Quiz:  Test Your Knowledge!

Martin J. O'Connell, Esq.


The following quiz questions are based on decisions by  the Courts.


1.  You ask your employees to park in the fenced-in company lot located across the street from the main entrance to your building.  It’s a busy public street with a lot automobile and pedestrian traffic. You provide a shuttle bus for employees that drops them off at the rear of your building, but most of them simply prefer to walk across the street to the nearest entrance. One morning, one of your employees is mugged as she begins to cross the street.  Is she eligible for Workers’ Compensation?


a) No. She had not yet begun work.
b) No. It occurred on a public street over which your company had no control.
c) No. She should have taken the shuttle bus to avoid something like this from happening.
d) Yes. She was in the course of her employment.


2.  At the end of their graveyard shift, a number of employees routinely stopped by the company cafeteria to pick up breakfast on their way home.  One morning, Ms. Java made her usual stop in the cafeteria to pick up some steaming hot coffee.  On her way from the cafeteria into the hall that led to the exit, she saw a friend also on his way out. Attempting to get his attention, she raised her arm that held the cup of coffee, inadvertently spilling it on herself.  As a result, she sustained first and second degree burns on her hand and arm. Is her injury eligible for Workers’ Compensation?


a) No. Her work day was over.
b) Yes. She got her coffee from the company cafeteria, and that’s what caused her burns.
c) It depends on whether or not she was careless and did not put a top on her coffee cup.
d) Yes. She was still on company property.

3.  The personnel assistant in the Human Resources office develops an “Employee Manual,” a project that she’s worked on everyday at the office for the past three weeks. The CEO finds it to be a brilliant original work that should be available in every office in the company.  He orders the HR Director to make multiple copies and send it off. The HR Director, a cautious soul, wonders if she can do that.

a)  She can. The company owns the copyright.

b)  Maybe, with the author’s permission. Both the author
      and the company own the copyright.

c)  She must have the author’s permission. The author
      owns the copyright.

d)  It depends.


4. The CEO notices that the main entry lobby is entirely too stark and needs some artwork to “make a statement.” After asking around, he finally locates a respected, known artist to do the job. Because he wants something bold (“large”), he offers the artist the use of the company shop as a place to work and the assistance of employees. The artist uses the shop and some of the company’s tools to create “Bold Statement,” an impressive blue ten-foot sculpture comprised of company widgets and whatnots. Art critics love the piece and so does the CEO, except for the color.  He asks the Paint Shop to paint “Bold Statement” red.  Can they?

a)  Yes. The company owns the rights to the sculpture.

b)  Maybe, with the artist’s permission. Both the artist
      and the company own the rights.

c)   No.  The artist owns the rights to the sculpture.

d)   It depends.




d) Yes. She was in the course of her employment.

Blair v. Daugherty (1978), 60 Ohio App.2d 165.


a) No. Her work day was over.
Jackson v. Univ. Hosp. of Cleveland (1997), 122 Ohio App.3d 371.


a)  She can. The company owns the copyright.

This is work prepared by an employee within the Assistant’s scope of employment duties.


c)  No.  The artist owns the rights to the sculpture.
ONLY the author of a work of visual art owns the rights to it, whether or not the author owns the copyright – unless the artist could be found to have been an employee under common law  test. A key would be the extent to which the company or CEO exercised control of the artist. The work must also be of “recognized stature.”






The content of this web site is for general information purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice or an attorney-client relationship. Contacting anyone at this e-mail address does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Any use of this web site is for personal use only. All other uses are prohibited. © 2003 - 2010 MARTIN JAMES O'CONNELL . All rights reserved.

For information about this web site, contact:


Copyright 2010 Martin James O'Connell


Home ] About Us ] Representative Matters ] Citations to the Law ] Litigation ] Employment Law ] Health Care ] Legal Resources ] dicta inter alia ] Privacy Policy ] Search ] E-mail ] Contact Information ]