Legal Opinion

Anderson v. Tuboscope Vetco, Inc.

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided October 6, 2000No. S-9080PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

CARPENETI, Justice.

I. INTRODUCTION

Lance Anderson appeals the superior court's grant of summary judgment to Tubo-scope Veteo, Inc. (Tuboscope) and Olsten Staffing Services (Olsten) on Anderson's negligence claim against Tuboscope for injuries he suffered while working as a temporary employee at Tuboscope's plant. Anderson argues that the superior court erred in ruling that Tuboscope was Anderson's special employer and was therefore exempted from suit by the exclusive remedy provision of the Alaska Workers' Compensation Act. Anderson further argues that the superior court erred in…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Exxon Corp. v. AlveyAlaska Supreme Court · 1984
  2. Claim of Shoemaker v. Manpower, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
  3. Childs v. Kalgin Island LodgeAlaska Supreme Court · 1989
  4. Pettaway v. Mobile Paint Mfg. Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1985
  5. Kelly v. Geriatric and Med. Serv.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1996

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Wingfoot Enterprises v. AlvaradoTexas Supreme Court · 2003
  2. Langfitt v. Federal Marine Terminals, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2011
  3. JB Contracting, Inc. v. BiermanMissouri Court of Appeals · 2004
  4. Old Harbor Native Corp. v. Afognak Joint VentureAlaska Supreme Court · 2001
  5. Bowens v. Allied Warehousing Services, Inc.West Virginia Supreme Court · 2012

7 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