Merryman v. Mattheus

How courts have described this case

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

• permitting the continued use of machinery that creates the risk of a possible injury does not show a conscious disregard for safety
• explaining that mere knowledge of vulnerability of employee to the possibility of injury is insufficient to amount to gross negligence; there must be a likelihood of injury from employee’s vulnerability greater than mere danger, rising to a “clear and present danger”
• upholding summary judgment, because allowing a crane operator to use a crane with a malfunctioning device designed to prevent lifting the load too high, after instructing crane operator not .too lift loads above certain height, did not support finding of gross negligence
• no gross negligence in death in crane accident where crane could have been operated safely despite malfunction

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).