Legal Opinion

Fiscus v. Atlantic Richfield

Wyoming Supreme Court

Decided May 11, 1989No. 88-218PublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THOMAS, Justice.

Our task in this case is to ascertain whether there exists any genuine issue of material fact which would prevent the entry of summary judgment against Sharon E. Fiscus and DeWayne Wuestenberg (Appellants) in their action to recover damages for injuries to Fiscus. They contend that Atlantic Richfield Company (ARCO) assumed affirmative duties with respect to safety at the Black Thunder Mine where Fiscus worked and that it owned the piece of heavy equipment (an earth-moving scraper) that Fiscus was operating when she was injured while working. Appellants insist that the record…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Johnson v. SoulisWyoming Supreme Court · 1975
  2. England v. SimmonsWyoming Supreme Court · 1986
  3. Jones v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1986
  4. Maxted v. Pacific Car & Foundry CompanyWyoming Supreme Court · 1974
  5. Duffy v. BrownWyoming Supreme Court · 1985

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

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. Roussalis v. Wyoming Medical Center, Inc.Wyoming Supreme Court · 2000
  2. Stauffer Chemical Co. v. CurryWyoming Supreme Court · 1989
  3. Loghry v. Unicover Corp.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1996
  4. Powder River Oil Co. v. Powder River Petroleum Corp.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1992
  5. Coones v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1993

22 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