DiSalvatore v. United States

499 F. Supp. 338 (1980)

From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

DiSalvatore v. United States

United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
499 F. Supp. 338 (1980)

Facts

Michael DiSalvatore (plaintiff) was a construction worker removing planks for an elevator shaft, which was a two-man job. However, DiSalvatore continued removing planks while his teammate was not present because an unwritten rule of construction work is that an idle employee can be immediately fired. The elevator shaft did not have a safety net or other safety device. While working alone, DiSalvatore fell into the open shaft and died. DiSalvatore’s estate sued the United States (defendant) for negligence. Testimony from coworkers William Simpson and Harry Rolf conflicted as to how many boards remained and where DiSalvatore was standing when he fell. However, Simpson and Rolf both testified that the planks were uneven, difficult to walk on, and easy to slip on, and that a worker who slipped would likely fall into the open shaft. After a bench trial, Chief Judge Lord rendered a verdict in favor of the U.S., finding DiSalvatore guilty of contributory negligence. DiSalvatore’s estate then moved for a new trial, and following oral arguments, the chief judge concluded that he had applied the incorrect standard of law and granted the estate’s motion.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Lord, C.J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,500 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership