-
554 F.2d 1237·
3d Cir.·
1977-04-25
·cited 61×
The court held that amended section 905(b) of the Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act is constitutional and that land-based negligence principles, not maritime non-delegable duties, apply to shipowner liability.
-
422 F.2d 610·
10th Cir.·
1970-02-27
·cited 53×
The court held that summary judgment was improper because genuine issues of material fact existed regarding the decedent's knowledge and appreciation of the specific dangers of hydrogen sulfide, and the applicability of Restatement (Second) of Torts § 343 principles.
-
572 F.2d 364·
2d Cir.·
1978-02-15
·cited 43×
The court held that the district judge erred in directing a verdict for the shipowner, as ambiguous testimony presented a jury question regarding the ship's officer's actions.
-
623 F.2d 1006·
5th Cir.·
1980-08-11
·cited 37×
The court held that admiralty jurisdiction was proper and that the defendants' consent to an amendment alleging admiralty jurisdiction waived their right to a jury trial. However, Texas Trailer's failure to cover openings was not the proximate cause of the injury, and Crescent wa
-
610 F.2d 116·
3d Cir.·
1979-08-24
·cited 33×
The court held that a vessel owner's duty under § 905(b) is to exercise reasonable care under the circumstances, rejecting arguments for a more limited standard or strict application of Restatement §§ 343-343A. The court also affirmed that a negligent shipowner is liable for the
-
524 F.2d 767·
3d Cir.·
1975-09-23
·cited 30×
The court affirmed the jury's verdict, finding no reversible error in the admission of evidence, counsel's remarks, or jury instructions, and upholding the exoneration of Hess and the finding of liability against CB & I.
-
567 F.2d 1237·
3d Cir.·
1977-12-15
·cited 20×
The government can be held directly liable for negligence if its employees fail to exercise reasonable care in overseeing a contractor's safety precautions, even if the contractor also has a duty to provide safety.
-
714 So. 2d 518·
Fla. 3d DCA·
1998-06-10
·cited 17×
Gregorio Armenteros, a subcontractor's employee, was injured on a construction site at Baptist Hospital and sued the hospital for negligence. The court held that Baptist Hospital, as the property owner who hired a general contractor, owed no duty of care to the subcontractor's em
-
795 F.2d 434·
5th Cir.·
1986-07-25
·cited 12×
The court held that the district court did not err in instructing the jury on sole cause, nor in refusing to instruct on inherently dangerous activities or implied duties, affirming the jury verdict for the defendant.
-
595 F.2d 1141·
9th Cir.·
1979-04-16
·cited 12×
The court held that under current New Mexico law, the government does not owe a nondelegable duty to employees of an independent contractor injured by the contractor's work, thus precluding FTCA relief.
-
132 F.2d 431·
5th Cir.·
1942-12-18
·cited 12×
The court held that the defendant owed a duty of care to the deceased, and there was sufficient evidence to present the issues of causation, negligence, and assumption of risk to the jury.
-
588 F.2d 403·
3d Cir.·
1978-12-04
·cited 11×
The United States is liable under the Federal Tort Claims Act for the death of an independent contractor's employee when the government had superior knowledge of a specific danger and failed to warn the contractor or employee.
-
950 F.2d 267·
5th Cir.·
1992-01-10
·cited 10×
The court held that Shell Oil Company was not liable for the injuries sustained by an independent contractor's employee, as Shell did not retain operational control over the contractor's work and the contractor was solely responsible for safety.
-
117 So. 3d 790·
Fla. 4th DCA·
2013-06-05
·cited 9×
Sterling Financial & Management, Inc., a property manager, was held liable by a jury for injuries sustained by an employee of a subcontractor who fell from an improperly used ladder. On appeal, the Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that Sterling did not exercise s
-
948 F.2d 187·
5th Cir.·
1991-12-06
·cited 9×
The court held that the district court correctly granted summary judgment because the plaintiffs failed to present evidence of a genuine issue of material fact regarding Shell's negligence or operational control over the independent contractor.
-
907 F.2d 726·
7th Cir.·
1990-07-23
·cited 8×
A time charterer owes no general duty to supervise stevedoring operations, and contractual arrangements did not impose such a duty in this case.
-
817 F.2d 1030·
3d Cir.·
1987-04-29
·cited 8×
The court held that the defendant property owner is not liable for injuries resulting from a danger that was obvious and known to the plaintiff, especially when the plaintiff is an experienced worker who repeatedly encountered the hazard.
-
762 F.2d 701·
8th Cir.·
1985-05-21
·cited 6×
The court held that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment on the inherent danger doctrine and in its jury instructions, requiring a new trial.
-
918 F.2d 1467·
9th Cir.·
1990-11-23
·cited 4×
A smelter operator owes an independent contractor's employee a duty to make premises reasonably safe, and a warning alone may not satisfy this duty if the operator should anticipate harm despite the warning.
-
889 F.2d 1469·
5th Cir.·
1989-12-15
·cited 4×
The court held that the trial court correctly granted a directed verdict in favor of Hydril because the evidence did not establish that Hydril exercised operational control over the plaintiff's work.
-
790 F.2d 1253·
5th Cir.·
1986-06-04
·cited 4×
The court held that the defendant, as the owner of premises where an independent contractor's employee was injured, did not owe a duty of care to the employee because the defendant did not retain or exercise control over the manner in which the work was performed.
-
957 F.2d 517·
7th Cir.·
1992-03-23
·cited 2×
A municipality is not liable under the Illinois Structural Work Act or common law negligence for a worker's injury if it was not in charge of the construction project and did not retain sufficient control over the work.
-
901 F.2d 183·
1st Cir.·
1990-04-19
·cited 1×
The court held that the general contractor did not retain sufficient control over the subcontractor's work to be liable for the subcontractor's employee's injuries.
-
Del. Super. Ct.·
2006-12-22
The court granted summary judgment for Delmarva Power & Light Company (DP&L) regarding the plaintiff's asbestos-related injuries at the Edgemoor facility, finding DP&L did not exercise the requisite degree of active control over the plaintiff's work. However, the court denied sum
-
Del. Super. Ct.·
2005-02-15
The court granted summary judgment for defendants on claims arising under Restatement (Second) of Torts §§ 324A, 410, and 414, finding that the defendants did not exercise the "active control" over the work necessary to establish liability. However, the court denied summary judgm
-
992 F.2d 719·
7th Cir.·
1993-04-30
The court held that genuine issues of material fact exist regarding the defendant's control over the construction project, precluding summary judgment.