Hirchak v. W.W. Grainger, Inc., No. 19-2642 (8th Cir. 2020)
Annotate this CasePlaintiff and his wife filed claims of negligence and failure to warn against Grainer, a distributor of industrial equipment, and its subsidiary, Dayton, after plaintiff was injured by a web sling at work. The Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment for defendants, holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion by excluding plaintiff's expert's opinion that the subject sling was a Grainger-distributed Juli sling. In this case, the district court concluded that the expert's report was inadmissible because his opinion that the subject sling was a Grainger-distributed Juli sling was based on insufficient facts. Without the expert's report, plaintiff failed to present sufficient evidence that defendants supplied the sling to the employer in order to defeat summary judgment.
Court Description: [Gruender, Author, with Colloton and Grasz, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Torts. In action alleging negligence and failure to warn in connection with an injury caused when a web sling defendant allegedly provided the injured worker's employer failed, plaintiff offered an expert report that concluded the subject sling was provided by defendant based on similarities between the sling and two slings known to be distributed by defendant; the district court did not err in determining the report was inadmissible because it was based on insufficient facts to show defendant had distributed the sling; defendant's summary judgment affirmed.
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.