Legal Opinion

Spinozzi v. E. J. Lavino & Co.

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided March 21, 1957No. 11900PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KALODNER, Circuit Judge.

Was sufficient evidence adduced at the trial upon which a jury could have found that the defendant, employer of an independent contractor, had retained such control as to make it liable for the negligent death of an employee of the independent contractor?

That is the question presented on this appeal from the judgment of the District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania ordering dismissal of the action after presentation of the evidence with respect to the liability phase of the case. The action was instituted by the plaintiff, Concetta Spinozzi,…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Allen v. WillardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1868
  2. Valles v. Peoples-Pittsburgh Trust Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
  3. JOHNSON v. ANGRETTISupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1950
  4. Cooper v. Heintz Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
  5. McGrath v. Pennsylvania Sugar Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Spinozzi v. Lavino CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1957
  2. Mascuilli v. American Export Isbrandtsen Lines, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1974
  3. Peter v. Public Constructors, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1966
  4. Win & Son, Inc. v. City of PhiladelphiaDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2016
  5. Margaret E. Peter, Administratrix and Administratrix Ad Prosequendum of the Estate of Ralph M. Peter, Deceased, in No. 15465 v. Public Constructors, Inc., and Public Contracting Corporation, and Third-Party and in No. 15466 v. Cunningham Construction Co., and Reid Construction Company, a Delaware Corp., Third-PartyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1966

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API