From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Frick v. Ensor

Supreme Court of Louisiana
Jun 1, 1990
560 So. 2d 446 (La. 1990)

Summary

holding wrestling promoter liable for the negligent injury of a spectator by a wrestler, who qualified as an independent contractor, because the promoter breached its "duty to . . . control the program in such a manner as not to create a dangerous situation"

Summary of this case from Graham v. Amoco Oil Co.

Opinion

No. 90-C-0570.

May 11, 1990. Rehearing Denied June 1, 1990.

In re Frick, Rose Lee; — Plaintiff(s); Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, Number 89CA-1000; Parish of Orleans Civil District Court Div. "C" Number 85-17534.


WRIT GRANTED.

The decision of the Court of Appeal is reversed. The trial court correctly found that "Mid-South had a duty to the plaintiff to control the program in such a manner as not to create a dangerous situation." The breach of that duty caused plaintiff's damages. The trial court's judgment is reinstated.

WATSON and LEMMON, JJ., dissent.


Summaries of

Frick v. Ensor

Supreme Court of Louisiana
Jun 1, 1990
560 So. 2d 446 (La. 1990)

holding wrestling promoter liable for the negligent injury of a spectator by a wrestler, who qualified as an independent contractor, because the promoter breached its "duty to . . . control the program in such a manner as not to create a dangerous situation"

Summary of this case from Graham v. Amoco Oil Co.

In Frick, 557 So.2d at 1023, the contract, unlike Amoco's contract, did not delineate which party was responsible for working conditions and safety.

Summary of this case from Graham v. Amoco Oil Co.
Case details for

Frick v. Ensor

Case Details

Full title:ROSE LEE FRICK v. WILLIAM C. ENSOR, ET AL

Court:Supreme Court of Louisiana

Date published: Jun 1, 1990

Citations

560 So. 2d 446 (La. 1990)

Citing Cases

Graham v. Amoco Oil Co.

Second, the plaintiffs argue that Amoco is liable for its own independent acts of negligence. Specifically,…