Leonard Chapman v. Westinghouse Electric Corporation, a Pennsylvania Corporation

Chapman appeals from the district court’s Summary judgment in favor of Westinghouse Electric Corporation (Westinghouse) on the ground of federal preemption. The district court had jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (a)(1), and we have jurisdiction over this timely appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We reverse.

I

Westinghouse, a private corporation, operated a government-owned nuclear reactor facility in Idaho. Chapman, a Navy enlisted man stationed at the reactor facility, was injured while on duty when a deck on which he was standing collapsed. Westinghouse designed and manufactured the deck for use at the reactor facility pursuant to a cost-plus-fixed-fee contract with the Department of Energy (DOE). The DOE-Westinghouse contract provided that the government would reimburse Westinghouse for all “[¡Judgments and litigation expenses” incurred in connection with the contract.

Chapman sued Westinghouse in federal district court for personal injuries under Idaho state tort law, alleging diversity jurisdiction. Westinghouse successfully moved for summary judgment, arguing that, due to the reimbursement clause, Chapman’s suit was in effect a suit against the government and…