Vargas v. McNamara
United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
608 F.2d 15 (1979)
- Written by Daniel Clark, JD
Facts
Harold Vargas and Columbus Baker (plaintiffs) were employed by Robert McNamara (defendant) to work on McNamara’s ship. McNamara instructed Vargas and Baker to clean the engine room. McNamara provided the two men with a spray gun, an industrial solvent, and a steam cleaner. McNamara did not furnish Vargas and Baker with any protective equipment. When Vargas and Baker used the solvent with the spray gun, they became engulfed in toxic fumes. McNamara did not provide Vargas and Baker with respirators that would have protected them from inhaling the toxic fumes. Vargas and Baker sued McNamara for negligence under the Jones Act. Vargas and Baker did not initially plead a case for unseaworthiness. When the district-court judge raised the unseaworthiness issue at trial, Vargas and Baker sought to amend their complaint to add it. The district court denied Vargas and Baker’s motion to amend and, as to the negligence count, issued a directed verdict in favor of McNamara.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Campbell, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 806,000 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.