Legal Opinion

Hoechst Celanese Corp. v. Mendez

Texas Supreme Court

Decided February 13, 1998No. 97-0860PublishedCited by 167 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

2Per curiam

What is an employer’s duty to an independent contractor’s employees when the employer requires the contractor to observe general workplace safety guidelines? Hoechst-Celanese Corp. hired Mundy Contract Maintenance, Inc., an independent contractor, to perform various maintenance services at the Celanese plants. While performing a Celanese work order, a Mundy employee sustained serious injuries when he fell from the shelf of a large metal tool box he was using as a ladder. The employee sued Celanese and claimed that the tool box was a premises defect and that Celanese was negligent in…

3Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Redinger v. Living, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1985
  2. Clayton W. Williams, Jr., Inc. v. OlivoTexas Supreme Court · 1997
  3. Abalos v. Oil Development Co. of TexasTexas Supreme Court · 1976
  4. Enserch Corp. v. ParkerTexas Supreme Court · 1990
  5. Exxon Corp. v. TidwellTexas Supreme Court · 1993

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

4Cited by167 opinions

  1. Lee Lewis Construction, Inc. v. HarrisonTexas Supreme Court · 2002
  2. Elliott-Williams Co., Inc. v. DiazTexas Supreme Court · 1999
  3. Koch Refining Co. v. ChapaTexas Supreme Court · 2000
  4. Shell Oil Co. v. KhanTexas Supreme Court · 2004
  5. General Electric Co. v. MoritzTexas Supreme Court · 2008

162 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