Glenda T. Landry v. Amoco Production Company

How courts have described this case

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

• reversing district court’s denial of plaintiff’s motion for a directed verdict because “the facts governing plaintiff's status as a seaman were established beyond cavil”
• reversing district court’s denial of plaintiff’s motion for a directed verdict because “the facts governing plaintiff's status as a seaman were established beyond cavil”
• reversing district court’s denial of plaintiff’s motion for a directed verdict because “the facts governing plaintiff's status as a seaman were established beyond cavil”
• reversing district court’s denial of plaintiff’s motion for a directed verdict because “the facts governing plaintiff's status as a seaman were established beyond cavil”
• reversing jury finding of no seaman status where plaintiff, injured while jumping from one barge to the other, \spent 70% of her time in vessel-related work activities\
• District Court should have directed verdict that plaintiff had seaman’s status for Jones Act suit since “reasonable persons” could not conclude otherwise

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).