Dunmire Motor Co. v. Oregon Mutual Fire Insurance

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that premises owner did not retain sufficient control over construction of scaffolding to subject it to negligence liability
• holding that witness statements “merely confirm[ing] that workers at the construction site had identified some defective scaffolding pieces” did not show that defective scaffolding caused the plaintiff's injury
• holding that a special circumstance was present where the defendant collected a scaffolding bar “for safekeeping because of its role in [the plaintiff's] accident” and “kn[ew] that [the plaintiff] was looking for it”
• explaining that causation requires the plaintiff “to prove that the loss of the evidence would cause him to lose the underlying case”
• noting that perfunctory arguments are waived (citing United States v. Hook, 471 F.3d 766, 775 (7th Cir. 2006))
• stating that plaintiff waived an argument to which he “devote[d] only a scant paragraph”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).