7 results for 'cat:"Tort" AND cat:"Negligence" AND cat:"Contract"'.
J. Wright finds the trial court properly entered summary judgment in favor of the wind turbine manufacturer. The dock worker fell from a man basket while unloading turbine blades from a ship and claims the manufacturer's negligent right of control over the details of the work led to his injury. The contract established the worker's employer was an independent contractor on the jobsite. The worker failed to meet his burden to establish the manufacturer controlled or had the right to control the work he was performing. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Wright , Filed On: May 2, 2024, Case #: 09-21-00177-CV, Categories: tort, negligence, contract
J. Johnston denies the roofing contractor's motion to dismiss the property management company's beach of contract suit claiming the negligence of the contractor's employees caused a new roof they were installing on the building leased by U-Haul to catch fire, eventually destroying the entire building. The contractor's argument using the West Virginia's "gist of the action doctrine" is unpersuasive, as the West Virginia Supreme Court has long recognized "an independent duty - sounding in tort - to prevent and mitigate accidental fires...[that] exists entirely independent of the parties’ contractual relationship."
Court: USDC Southern District of West Virginia, Judge: Johnston, Filed On: February 29, 2024, Case #: 5:23cv339, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: tort, negligence, contract
J. Xinis grants the school and host parent’s motion to dismiss this negligence and contract dispute brought by the parents of an exchange student, who say the student was sodomized by his host parent. The parents fail to make a plausible liability theory of negligence or state any facts which support the existence of an implied-in-fact contract. The parents’ motion for leave is granted to cure any defects as to the school only in their amended complaint.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Xinis, Filed On: November 1, 2023, Case #: 8:22cv3117, NOS: Other Personal Injury - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: tort, negligence, contract
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Crocker finds largely in favor of the food testing laboratory in a lawsuit from a protein powder manufacturer claiming the laboratory contaminated its products with Salmonella during testing, causing millions of dollars of damages in out-of-pocket costs and lost profits. Due to the nature of the business relationship between the parties and the terms of the agreement the two entered in 2017, the manufacturer is barred from bringing its claim under Wisconsin's Deceptive Trade Practices Act, and its negligence claim is dismissed without prejudice according to the economic loss doctrine under the applicable Iowa law. The laboratory has until June 9, 2023, to reassert its negligence claim in an amended complaint.
Court: USDC Western District of Wisconsin, Judge: Crocker, Filed On: May 11, 2023, Case #: 3:22cv655, NOS: Other Personal Property Damage - Torts - Personal Property, Categories: tort, negligence, contract
J. Grogan finds the circuit court improperly granted summary judgment to the general contractor in a lawsuit from a painting subcontractor employee who fell down an exposed elevator shaft at the contractor's residential remodel construction site, causing injuries requiring cranial and spinal surgeries. The independent contractor rule from Wisconsin Supreme Court precedent does not shield the contractor from liability for the employee's injuries, in part because the only written contract it entered related to the project, which it signed with the company who provided the elevator, held that the contractor was solely responsible for the safety of all workers and subcontractors with relation to the elevator shaft before the elevator was installed. Because there also remain disputed facts about whether the two-by-four guardrails installed on the shaft and other safety precautions protect the contractor from the employee's negligence and safe place claims, the contractor cannot be dismissed, but the part of the circuit court's summary judgment order dismissing the contractor's employee individually is upheld. All other matters, including the claims of an insurance company, will be handled on remand. Reversed in part.
Court: Wisconsin Court of Appeals, Judge: Grogan, Filed On: May 10, 2023, Case #: 2021AP001720, Categories: tort, negligence, contract