Legal Opinion

E. Max Woodbury II v. CH2M Hill, Inc.

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided March 21, 2001No. 9706-04494; CA A103037PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLandau, P. J.

Plaintiff was injured while working for a subcontractor on a construction site. He initiated this action against defendant, the general contractor CH2M Hill, Inc., for violation of the Employer Liability Act (ELA), ORS 654.305 et seq., and for negligence. The jury returned a verdict for plaintiff on both claims, and defendant appeals. Among other things, defendant assigns error to the trial court’s denial of motions for directed verdict on the ELA and negligence claims. According to defendant, the evidence is legally insufficient to support a claim against the general contractor. We agree and…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Fazzolari v. Portland School District No. 1JOregon Supreme Court · 1987
  2. Fuhrer v. Gearhart by the Sea, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1988
  3. Thomas v. FoglioOregon Supreme Court · 1961
  4. Wilson v. Portland General Electric CompanyOregon Supreme Court · 1968
  5. Sacher v. Bohemia, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1987

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of EadieOregon Supreme Court · 2001
  2. Woodbury v. CH2M Hill, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 2003
  3. Rathgeber v. James Hemenway, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2001
  4. Boothby v. D.R. Johnson Lumber Co.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2002
  5. Yeatts v. Polygon Northwest Co.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2014

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API