Gyerman v. United States Lines Co.
California Supreme Court
498 P.2d 1043 (1972)
- Written by Jamie Milne, JD
Facts
John Gyerman (plaintiff) worked as a longshoreman for Associated Banning Company (Banning). Banning assigned Gyerman to work in a warehouse owned by United States Lines Company (Lines) (defendant). Gyerman was tasked with using a forklift to reorganize stacked pallets containing sacks of fishmeal. Fishmeal sacks were prone to instability. Consequently, they were customarily stacked in a staggered formation for support. Gyerman noticed that Lines’ sacks were not stacked that way. He notified a Lines employee but was told nothing could be done. Gyerman did not report the situation to his Banning supervisor, which would have been standard industry practice. Further, Gyerman continued to work on the project despite a provision in his union contract stating that longshoremen were expected to cease work immediately upon discovering an unsafe condition. On Gyerman’s fourth day at Lines, approximately 12 sacks of fishmeal fell on him, injuring his back and legs. Gyerman sued Lines for negligence. Lines asserted contributory negligence as a defense, arguing that Gyerman’s own negligence in failing to stop work and report the unsafe condition was a contributing cause of his injuries. The trial court held in Lines’ favor, concluding that Lines was negligent but that Gyerman’s own contributory negligence negated Lines’ liability. Gyerman appealed to the California Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Sullivan, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.