Constance Kottis, as Administratrix of the Estate of Christos Kottis v. United States Steel Corporation
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
TONE, Circuit Judge.
We are asked by the plaintiff-appellant in this diversity case to hold that the Indiana Workmen’s Compensation Act does not provide the exclusive remedy for injury or death incurred in the course of and in the scope of employment when the employer is in a “dual capacity,” i. e., is both the employer and also the owner of the land, or also the manufacturer of defective equipment, on which the accident occurred. We agree with the District Court that the Act provides the exclusive remedy and therefore affirm a summary judgment in favor of the defendant.
Plaintiff’s decedent,…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Reed v. the YakaSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Duprey v. ShaneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
- Marcus v. GreenAppellate Court of Illinois · 1973
- In re BowersIndiana Court of Appeals · 1917
- Seaton v. United States Rubber Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1945
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by30 opinions
- Douglas v. E. & J. GALLO WINERYCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977
- Sharp v. GallagherIllinois Supreme Court · 1983
- Ross v. SchubertIndiana Court of Appeals · 1979
- Freese v. Consolidated Rail Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1983
- Indiana University Hospitals v. CarterIndiana Court of Appeals · 1983
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.