Kotecki v. Cyclops Welding Corp.

585 N.E.2d 1023 (1991)

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

Kotecki v. Cyclops Welding Corp.

Illinois Supreme Court
585 N.E.2d 1023 (1991)

Facts

Mark A. Kotecki (plaintiff) alleged that he sustained personal injuries when his hand was caught in an agitator motor while he was acting within the scope of his employment with Carus Chemical Company (Carus) (defendant). Kotecki brought an action against Cyclops Welding Corporation (Cyclops) (defendant), claiming that it negligently designed, constructed, and installed the agitator on Carus property without sufficient guarding devices for the motor and drive system. Cyclops filed a third-party complaint against Carus for contribution under the Contribution Act in an amount proportionate to the degree of fault attributable to Carus’s culpability if Carus was found liable to Kotecki at trial. Carus moved to strike the ad damnum clause of the third-party-contribution claim. The trial court denied the motion, and Carus brought an interlocutory appeal. Carus argued that it was unclear whether the employer’s liability was limited to the employer’s workers’-compensation liability. Cyclops claimed that the employer’s contribution was limited only by the extent of damages attributable to the employer’s negligence.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Moran, 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