Cheryl Harris v. Kellogg Brown & Root Services

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that military-contractor defendant must show evidence of servicemember’s negligence to support that its negligence defense implicates political question
• holding that the military did not retain command authority over KBR’s installation and maintenance of the defective water pump because “the relevant contracts and work orders did not prescribe how KBR was to perform the work required of it”
• noting that “from KBR’s perspective, the military foresaw the exact harm suffered by [the soldier]” and concluding that KBR “presented sufficient evidence to invoke its proximate-cause defense under Texas law”
• stating that “evaluating whether [the contractor’s] work complied with [a “safe manner”] standard is a factual question for the fact finder—a question that, again, does not require evaluating any military decisions”
• noting that “[mjilitary control requires evaluation' of military decisions because if the contractor is 5 simply doing what the military ordered it to-do, then review of the contractor’s actions . necessarily includes review of the military order direct^ ing the action”
• maintaining electrical systems on a military base in a warzone qualified as combatant activity

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).