Skip to main content
Federal & State Lawfederalstatelaw.com
Home/Federal/Cases
Appellate Court of Illinois· 2/27/2004

Martens v. MCL Construction Corp.

Citations

  • 807 N.E.2d 480
  • 347 Ill. App. 3d 303
  • 282 Ill. Dec. 856
  • 2004 Ill. App. LEXIS 164

How courts have described this case

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

  • providing a discussion of the history of section 414 of the Restatement and the Act as well as the relationship between the two
  • highlighting Moss’ misconstruction of Shaughnessy, criticizing its reliance on contract language alone, and advocating a more balanced approach
  • providing a discussion of the history of section 414 of the Restatement and the Act as well as the relationship between the two
  • central issue under section 414 “is retained control of the independent contractor’s work” (emphasis added)
  • “We do not ... equate those [general] safety responsibilities with control over the means and methods of [the subcontractor's] ... work .... ” (emphasis added)
  • whether a duty exists under section 414 “turns on whether the defendant controls the work in such a manner that he should be held liable”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Fitzgerald Smith

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

47 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

29 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Martens v. MCL Construction Corp.

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.