From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Beason v. United States

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
May 31, 1968
396 F.2d 2 (5th Cir. 1968)

Summary

In Beason v. United States, 396 F.2d 2 (5th Cir. 1968), where there was a contract very similar to the present one and an employee of an independent contractor was injured, it was held that there was no duty imposed upon the United States to maintain safe working conditions for the employee where the only governmental undertaking relied upon was a safety inspection program in connection with work being performed by the independent contractor.

Summary of this case from Lemley v. United States

Opinion

No. 25237.

May 31, 1968.

Hollis C. Thompson, Jr., Gulfport, Miss., Wm. B. Baggett, Lake Charles, La., Sydney B. Nelson, Shreveport, La., Mize, Thompson Mize, Gulfport, Miss., Pugh Nelson, Shreveport, La., Long, Strong, Jackson Strong, Carthage, Tex., Baggett, Hawsey McClain, Lake Charles, La., for appellants.

Robert E. Hauberg, U.S. Atty., Joseph E. Brown, Jr., Asst. U.S. Atty., Jackson, Miss., Edwin R. Holmes, Jr., Asst. U.S. Atty., for Appellee United States.

Before TUTTLE and DYER, Circuit Judges, and MEHRTENS, District Judge.


This is an appeal from the District Court's order granting summary judgment in favor of the United States in a Federal Tort Claims Act suit. Appellants, employees of an independent contractor doing construction work for the United States, fell and were injured when rigging, owned by the contractor, being used to hoist a hangar door into place broke, causing the door to fall through the scaffolding on which appellants were working. Appellants urge that the District Court erred in granting summary judgment because there were material facts in dispute concerning whether or not the United States negligently breached its duty to maintain safety standards thus causing appellants' injuries. We affirm.

It affirmatively appears that the provisions of the contract between the United States and the independent contractor upon which appellants rely did not, by their terms, impose a duty on the United States to maintain safe working conditions and "where the only Governmental undertaking relied upon is a safety inspection program in connection with work being performed by an independent contractor," no liability under the Good Samaritan Doctrine for negligent performance of the contract by the independent contractor can attach to the United States. Roberson v. United States, 9 Cir. 1967, 382 F.2d 714, 721-722. The United States was entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Beason v. United States

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
May 31, 1968
396 F.2d 2 (5th Cir. 1968)

In Beason v. United States, 396 F.2d 2 (5th Cir. 1968), where there was a contract very similar to the present one and an employee of an independent contractor was injured, it was held that there was no duty imposed upon the United States to maintain safe working conditions for the employee where the only governmental undertaking relied upon was a safety inspection program in connection with work being performed by the independent contractor.

Summary of this case from Lemley v. United States
Case details for

Beason v. United States

Case Details

Full title:J. Carl BEASON and Vesta G. Barnett, Appellants, v. UNITED STATES of…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

Date published: May 31, 1968

Citations

396 F.2d 2 (5th Cir. 1968)

Citing Cases

Musgrave v. Tennessee Valley Authority

The case is therefore a proper one for summary judgment. Beason v. United States, 396 F.2d 2 (5th Cir. 1968).…

United States v. Aretz

See Warner v. Synnes, 114 Or. 451 ( 230 P. 362, 44 ALR 904) (1924); 41 AmJur2d 777, supra; 57 CJS 353, 371,…