Salazar v. a & J Construction of Montana, Inc.

Good Law
583 F. App'x 673
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 16, 201413-35352California571 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Plaintiff Juan Salazar (“Salazar”) appeals from a jury verdict finding Defendant A & J Construction of Montana, Inc. (“A & J”) not liable for injuries Salazar sustained.when he fell while working at an A & J construction project. At the time of his fall, Salazar was not wearing his fall protection harness. The jury found that although A & J was negligent, A & J’s negligence did not cause Salazar’s injuries. This is a diversity jurisdiction action governed by the substantive law of Montana. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Salazar contends that Montana law prohibited the district court from admitting evidence that A & J imposed certain safety requirements on its subcontractors. According to Salazar, the admission of such evidence permitted A & J to argue that it had delegated to subcontractors its nondel-egable duty under the Montana Safety Act, Mont.Code Ann. § 50-71-201, to provide Salazar with a safe work environment. See Olson v. Shumaker Trucking & Exca- voting Contractors, Inc., 347 Mont. 1, 15 , 196 P.3d 1265 (2008).

We need not decide this question of Montana law, because even if the district court erred by admitting evidence that A…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.