Vegas Lawyer
Helping People Who
Were Hurt In Nevada

Dempsey, Roberts
& Smith, Ltd.
Attorneys-At-Law




Vegas Lawyer
Nevada Legal Help


Home
Mesothelioma
Slip & Fall
Medical Injury
Product Defect
Other Claims
Articles
Contact Us


Las Vegas Lawyer

Vegas Injury Law

Welcome to Vegas Lawyer. This site is for people who were hurt in Nevada. Contact us for a free consultation. You may want to read the Las Vegas Personal Injury Law introduction on our home page. Also, you can get an overview of other Nevada Legal Topics before you read the Article below.

vegaslawyer.net


  • Independent Contractor Exception












  • Independent Contractor Exception

    FOR PUBLICATION

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

    MATTHEW LAURENCE, et al.,
    Plaintiffs-Appellants,

    No. 94-16011 v.

    D.C. No. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY; U.S.

    CV-93-00381-DLJ DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
    URBAN DEVELOPMENT; UNITED OPINION STATES OF AMERICA,
    Defendants-Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California D. Lowell Jensen, District Judge, Presiding

    Argued and Submitted
    June 14, 1995--San Francisco, California

    Filed June 28, 1995

    Before: Mary M. Schroeder, Robert R. Beezer, and David R. Thompson, Circuit Judges.

    Opinion by Judge Schroeder

    COUNSEL

    Richard L. Bowers, The Boccardo Law Firm, San Jose, California, for the plaintiffs-appellants.

    Eva M. Plaza and Steven M. Talson, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for the defendantsappellees.


    OPINION

    SCHROEDER, Circuit Judge:

    Plaintiffs, 250 current and past residents of the Midway Village public housing complex in Daly City, California, appeal the district court's grant of summary judgment to the government in their suit under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. SS 1341(b), 2671-80. Plaintiffs sought damages for personal injuries allegedly caused by the government in connection with the 1944 construction of Midway Village, national defense housing which later became a low-income housing project. The complaint alleges that the government negligently used soil contaminated with lampblack as landfill for the original facility. The published district court opinion fully discusses the suit's background and the parties' arguments. Laurence v. United States, 851 F. Supp. 1445 (N.D. Cal. 1994).

    The district court granted summary judgment to the government on two separate and independent grounds. One ground was that the challenged activity was performed by an independent contractor. Id. at 1452-53. Under the FTCA, the United States is subject to liability for the negligence of an independent contractor only if it can be shown that the government had authority to control the detailed physical performance of the contractor and exercised substantial supervision over its day-to-day activities. See United States v. Orleans, 425 U.S. 807, 814-15 (1976); Letnes v. United States, 820 F.2d 1517, 1519 (9th Cir. 1987).

    [1] We agree with the district court that the independent contractor exception bars liability in this case. The evidence established that the Federal Public Housing Authority ("FPHA") directed the construction of the military housing facility for use by the U.S. Navy. The FPHA contracted with the civilian architectural and engineering firm of Ellinger, Lee & Mitchell ("EL&M") to do a feasibility study, and to survey, design and construct the housing facility. Charles Lee, a name partner in EL&M and the civil engineer in charge of the project, testified in a 1948 eminent domain valuation proceeding that he "signed a contract" with the United States and made the decision to use fill.

    [2] Lee did not testify that he made or approved the actual decision to use the contaminated landfill. The record shows, however, that EL&M was charged with this task. With the exception of a letter authorization from FPHA to EL&M, dated November 13, 1944 and authorizing EL&M to conduct a "Survey of Subsurface Foundation Conditions, Surface Drainage and Existing Utilities for [Midway Village]," there is no credible evidence of governmental activity. The letter authorization does not create a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the government exercised the requisite "substantial supervision" by controlling the detailed physical performance and day-to-day work of EL&M. See Letnes, 820 F.2d at 1519. Accordingly, the independent contractor exception bars liability in this case.

    Assuming that the United States was responsible for the decision to use contaminated fill, the district court also decided that the government would have no liability because of the discretionary function exception to the FTCA, 28 U.S.C. S 2680(a). See Laurence, 851 F. Supp. at 1450-52. Because we find that the activity at issue here is governed by

    the independent contractor exception, we find it unnecessary to reach the issue of the applicability of the discretionary function exception.

    AFFIRMED.



    *** Any law, statute, regulation or other precedent is subject to change at any time ***

    Index | Home

    Contact David Matheny, Esq. for a free consultation.

    (702) 388-1229




    Lawyer Search | Attorney Finder


    Search for more information on Vegas Law and Las Vegas Lawyers:

       




    Las Vegas Legal Help
    Vegas Law


















    Vegas Lawyer
    Vegas Lawyers

    Index | Home

    Find A Lawyer By State | Search For Attorneys By City | Get Legal Information | Contact Us





    DEMPSEY, ROBERTS & SMITH, LTD.
    520 South Fourth Street, Suite 360
    Las Vegas, Nevada 89101

    Las Vegas Lawyer - Las Vegas Attorney - Las Vegas Personal Injury Lawyer

    Neither the State Bar of Nevada nor any agency of the State Bar has certified any lawyer identified here as a specialist or as an expert.  Anyone considering a lawyer should independently investigate the lawyer's credentials and ability. This site is intended for Nevada residents and those with legal issues arising under the jurisdiction of the State of Nevada.  This site does not give legal advice or create an attorney-client relationship.  Laws are different in other states and localities, consult a local attorney.

    The information in this web site is provided for informational purposes only. The information does not constitute legal advice. The use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship. Further communication with an attorney through the web site and e-mail may not be considered as confidential or privileged. Please contact our attorneys if you wish to discuss the contents of this web site. Any laws, rules or statutes giving any information, restrictions or deadlines, are always subject to change at any time - Contact a local attorney to obtain the current status of such information.

    In the series of Articles on this site, many government PSAs and other information are excerpted. All such materials are believed to be in the public domain. If any work is protected, contact the webmaster at any of the e-mail links and the material will be taken off the site immediately.

    If you experience unusual problems with this site or discover bad links, please email the webmaster. Thank you.

    Copyright: David Matheny, 2003-2005.