Dave Jordan v. Apache Corp

U.S. Courts of Appeals

Decided October 8, 2009

U.S. Courts of Appeals · decided 2009-10-08

Cited by 1 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2010

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2009-10-08

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM: *

¶1 The judgment of the district court is affirmed. The plaintiff has faded to raise an issue of negligence by either Apache or Island Operating. Counsel would charge these defendants with a legal duty to foresee all of the circumstances that led the plaintiff to carry the toolbox and to take action to guard against any injury to him. The failure to do this, or to publish a policy requiring it, cannot be said to be unreasonable or violation of duty to Mr. Jordan.

¶2 AFFIRMED.

¶3 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.