Melvin R. Comer v. Texaco, Inc., and the Travelers Insurance Company
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
1Per curiam
Comer was injured during the course of a robbery of the gas station where he was employed. The station is located, as Comer admittedly knew before the robbery, in a high-crime area. He argues his employer failed to exercise reasonable care in protecting employees’ safety — despite Comer’s express request therefor. Appellees respond that Comer knew the risks and assumed them. The District Court granted summary judgment for Employer, and we affirm, on the basis of Pfister v. Phoenix of Hartford Insurance Co., La.App., 4 Cir., 1974, 290 So.2d 362 and Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins, 1938, 304 U.S.…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Langlois v. Allied Chemical CorporationSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1971
- Ford Motor Company v. Marvin R. MathisCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1963
- Pfister v. Phoenix of Hartford Insurance CompanyLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1974
- Pfister v. Phoenix of Hartford InsuranceSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1974
3Cited by7 opinions
- Budget Rent-A-Car System, Inc. v. Nicole Chappell Joseph Powell, III Nicole ChappellCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2005
- Guy D. Dipascal And/or Barbara C. Dipascal, Individually and on Behalf of Their Daughter Gina Dipascal, Cross-Appellants v. New York Life Insurance Company, Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1985
- Lorraine Jones v. Pullman Kellogg CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1986
- DiPascal v. New York Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1985
- Budget Rent Car Sys v. ChappellCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2005
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.