Brown v. Boise Cascade Corp.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the trial court erred in excluding expert opinion testimony regarding the adequacy of lighting in a workplace
• applying OEC 702; quoting Yundt v. D & D Bowl, Inc., 259 Or 247, 258, 486 P2d 553 (1971)
• telling the plaintiff where to paint did not amount to retained or actual control
• certain safety regulations may apply to owners where the regulation pertains to “workplace structures or safeguards”
• “[O]wners are obligated, as a structural matter, to equip workplaces with lighting adequate for the work that ordinarily would occur within that type of work space.”
• the defendant owner was entitled to directed verdict on common-law negligence claims where there was no evidence that the defendant knew that subcontractor, who was the plaintiffs employer, would use unguarded roof as work platform

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).