Lundy v. Adamar of New Jersey, Inc.
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
34 F.3d 1173 (1994)
- Written by Craig Conway, LLM
Facts
Sidney Lundy (plaintiff), age 66, suffered a heart attack while playing blackjack at TropWorld Casino (TropWorld) owned by Adamar of New Jersey, Inc. (defendant). Immediately after collapsing onto the floor, Lundy was assisted by three other nearby patrons of the casino, two of which were physicians and one an emergency care nurse who provided aid. Additionally, casino personnel called for medical assistance to be provided by a nurse employed by TropWorld. Nurse Slusher arrived at Lundy’s location within two minutes of the call with an ambu-bag and oxygen. The physician patrons requested an intubation tube in order to establish an airway and to provide oxygen to Lundy in a more efficient manner. However, Slusher did not bring an intubation tube to the scene because it was TropWorld policy not to do so and she was not qualified to use it despite there being one located on the premises. Slusher and the three patrons performed CPR on Lundy until offsite paramedics arrived at TropWorld. The paramedics eventually intubated Lundy and revived him. Lundy suffered permanent injuries. Lundy filed suit in federal district court against TropWorld alleging the casino owed a duty to have a full-time physician onsite to perform basic first aid to a patron. The district court disagreed and found that TropWorld was not negligent in carrying out its duty of care to its customers. The district court granted summary judgment to TropWorld. Lundy appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Stapleton, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 779,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 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.
