Posted on Sep 23, 2014
Yesterday, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report on its review of U.S. oil and gas transportation infrastructure issues. Specifically, the report examines the overall challenges that increased domestic oil and gas production may pose for transportation infrastructure, as well as specific pipeline and rail safety risks and the steps the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) is taking to address those risks. While the GAO report credits DOT for its work to identify and address risks, it cites rural gathering pipelines that are not subject to safety regulations in...
Continue Reading
Posted on Sep 22, 2014
Under Delaware law, a manufacturer or distributor’s duty to warn “extends only to those who can reasonably be assumed are ignorant of the danger.” Following a maintenance mechanic’s injury at a Delaware plastics manufacturing facility sustained when a pump exploded while he was attempting to change out an embossing roll on a pump assembly, the mechanic alleged a failure to warn claim against multiple defendants involved in the distribution chain for the equipment. The Superior Court of Delaware dismissed the claim, finding that the mechanic was admittedly aware of the dangerous propensity...
Continue Reading
Posted on Sep 21, 2014
The Sixth Circuit concluded that work as a Mine Safety and Health Administration mine inspector is not qualifying coal mine employment for purposes of the Black Lung Benefits Act. The court agreed that the mine inspector satisfied the “situs” test of the act given that the inspector spent much of his workday underground in coal mines. The inspector, however, did not meet the “function” test of the act that required workers to be involved in the extraction, preparation, or transportation of coal, or coal mine construction or maintenance.
Continue Reading
Posted on Sep 21, 2014
Although the facts alleged by the family of a worker killed in a Mississippi fish processing facility are disturbing, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi concluded that they do not give rise to justiciable tort claims beyond Mississippi’s workers’ compensation regime. The complaint alleged that following the worker’s conversations with union representatives about organizing the workers at the plant, the worker’s supervisor and others began harassing him, including pushing him into machinery, flattening his tires in the parking lot, and writing obscene messages...
Continue Reading
Posted on Sep 20, 2014
The U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota confronted the extent to which non-manufacturing sellers can be liable under North Dakota law in a case involving a worker’s injuries sustained when a hose part of a paint-spray system failed while painting the inside of a wind turbine tower. Under a North Dakota law, a non-manufacturing seller is to be dismissed from a case once the product manufacturer is properly identified subject to certain exceptions. The product in this case was manufactured by a Swiss corporation not a party to the lawsuit. Although the court found that the...
Continue Reading
Posted on Sep 18, 2014
Following a 13-week trial in 2011, a Missouri jury awarded sixteen children alleged exposed to lead poisoning from contaminated air and soil a total of nearly $40 million in compensatory damages and $320 million in punitive damages that was allocated among three owners of a lead smelter from 1986 to 1994. The children’s lawyers’ case was focused on the owners placing business profits over human safety. On Tuesday, the Missouri Court of Appeals issued an opinion of more than 100 pages highlighting the effects that lead poisoning has had on each child’s life and echoing the poignant evidence...
Continue Reading
Posted on Sep 17, 2014
The Third Circuit denied a plaintiff’s request for a new trial in a diversity products-liability action filed in federal court against a ladder manufacturer. In the underlying action, the plaintiff filed suit against the manufacturer after being injured when falling off one of the manufacturer’s ladders. The plaintiff argued he was entitled to a new trial because the district court erred by (1) applying the Restatement (Third) over the Restatement (Second) to his strict liability claim; and (2) precluding him from introducing evidence of other accidents involving ladders. The Third...
Continue Reading