Legal Opinion
Eaton v. Jarvis Products Corp.
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Decided May 29, 1992No. 91-1089PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
STEPHEN H. ANDERSON, Circuit Judge.
Appellant Paul Eaton filed this diversity action in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado, alleging that defendant Jarvis Products Corporation (“Jarvis”) was strictly liable and liable under a theory of negligence for injuries Eaton suffered while sharpening a piece of equipment manufactured by Jarvis. Eaton’s injuries occurred during the course of his employment with Monfort of Colorado, Inc. (“Monfort”). Monfort, as a self-insured employer, asserted a subrogation claim against Jarvis to recover the workers’ compensation benefits…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Dandridge v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- San Antonio Independent School District v. RodriguezSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- McGowan v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
- Salve Regina College v. RussellSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Commissioner v. Estate of BoschSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Yao-Wen Chang v. Baxter Healthcare Corp.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2010
- Oklahoma Radio Associates, an Oklahoma General Partnership of J. Patrick Collins and Greg L. Armstrong J. Patrick Collins, an Individual and Greg L. Armstrong, an Individual v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, as Receiver for Citizens National Bank and Trust Company v. Magnolia Broadcasting Company, Inc., Third-PartyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1993
- Paul Eaton v. Jarvis Products CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1992
- Winters v. Board of County CommissionersCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1993
- LMS Holding Co. v. Core-Mark Mid-Continent, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1995
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.