3/31/2023 0 Comments Edwin oster![]() ![]() Paragraph 4.18 of the contract between Kastner and Medtronic provides: Did Oster's injuries arise out of "the performance of the Work" contemplated by the contract? Does Kastner's contract expressly provide that Kastner will indemnify CAM for CAM's own negligence? Instead, Kastner appeals the trial court's ruling that Kastner's contract with Medtronic obligates Kastner to indemnify CAM for the entire judgment, including the amounts attributable to CAM's own negligence. Kastner does not contest the jury's apportionment of negligence. The jury apportioned negligence as follows: Oster's damage claim was settled prior to trial, but the claims between the defendants and Kastner were not. Kastner was brought into the suit as a third-party defendant. Oster sued CAM and Medtronic for his injuries. Oster sustained back injuries and underwent back surgery as a result of his fall. When he sat down, the bench collapsed, and Oster fell to the floor. Unbeknownst to Oster someone had removed one of the buckets under the make-shift bench upon which he normally sat when changing. Oster then went to his regular spot in the shelter to change into his work clothes. On June 2, 1980, a CAM employee let Oster into the shelter at about 7:00 a.m. Oster was employed by Kastner as a plasterer on the construction project. This was done with the knowledge and permission of CAM. Instead, Kastner's employees, including the plaintiff Edwin Oster, regularly took their breaks and changed clothes in a construction shelter built and maintained by CAM on the *118 work site. Kastner never provided its employees with a shelter at the construction site, however. Under OSHA regulations, each trade contractor, including Kastner, was required to provide its own employees with a place to change clothes and eat lunch. Kastner's contract obligated it to provide for the safety of its employees working on the project. (Kastner), the trade contractor which performed the plastering work on the project, signed a contract prepared by CAM, with Medtronic in January, 1980. CAM's duties included preparing contracts between Medtronic and other trade contractors and supervising the overall operation of the construction project. (CAM) to have CAM act as the construction manager of a project aimed at building an addition onto one of Medtronic's buildings. (Medtronic) contracted with Construction Analysis and Management, Inc. This appeal is from a trial court's ruling requiring a contractor to indemnify a construction manager for the construction manager's own negligence. Heard, considered and decided by NORTON, P.J., and HUSPENI and KALITOWSKI, JJ. Erstad, Minneapolis, for Albert Kastner & Sons, Inc. Peterson, Minneapolis, for Medtronic, Inc. MEDTRONIC, INC., third-party plaintiff, Respondent,ĪLBERT KASTNER & SONS, INC., third-party defendant, Appellant. MEDTRONIC, INC., Construction Analysis and Management, Inc., Respondents. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |