Bedford v. Doe, No. 16-4558 (8th Cir. 2018)
Annotate this CaseAfter plaintiff was injured by a load of boxes he was hauling, he filed suit against IP and John Doe, an employee of IP, alleging that Doe negligently failed to secure the load and that IP negligently supervised the loading and inspecting of the trailer and was vicariously responsible for Doe's negligence. The Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of plaintiff's motion for reconsideration of the district court's grant of summary judgment for IP. The court held that the district court correctly noted that plaintiff made no evidentiary showing that IP or Doe had breached a duty of care owed to him, so there was no evidence that anyone committed a negligent act. Furthermore, plaintiff failed to produce any evidence showing that negligence in the loading process caused his injuries, and that he was deemed to have admitted that causes other than negligence could well have caused the load to fall on him.
Court Description: Arnold, Author, with Smith, Chief Judge, and Kelly, Circuit Judge] Civil case - Torts. Appeal of a denial of a Rule 59(e) motion allows challenge of the underlying ruling that produced the judgment even if the notice of appeal did not refer to the underlying order granting summary judgment; the district court did not err in granting defendant IP summary judgment as plaintiff made no evidentiary showing that defendants breached a duty of care or committed a negligent act.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.