Edward J. Barrett, Jr. v. Chas. H. Tompkins Company

262 F.2d 923
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit·Decided February 16, 1959·No. 14420_1·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff-appellant, a garage attendant, was seriously injured while using a “man-lift” on his employer’s premises. Workmen’s compensation having been duly paid him, he brought suit for damages against his employer, the builder of the building, the owners of the building (who had leased the premises to the employer), and the manufacturer of the lift. The District Court, after reviewing the pleadings, the deposition of the plaintiff, and certain exhibits, granted summary judgment to the defendants. We find no error affecting substantial rights. Cf. Jamieson v. Woodward & Lothrop, 101 U.S.App.D.C. 32, 247 F.2d 23, certiorari denied, 1957, 355 U.S. 855, 78 S.Ct. 84, 2 L.Ed.2d 63.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Edward J. Barrett, Jr. v. Chas. H. Tompkins Company, 262 F.2d 923 (D.C. Cir. 1959).

262 F.2d 923 (Edward J. Barrett, Jr. v. Chas. H. Tompkins Company) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Marguerite Jamieson v. Woodward & Lothrop
247 F.2d 23 (D.C. Circuit, 1957)