Gill V Evansville Sheet Metal Works

Evansville sheet metal works inc 970 n e 2d 633 637 n 4 ind.

Gill v evansville sheet metal works.

Evansville sheet metal works inc. June 25 2012 docket number. 49s05 1111 cv 672 justia opinion summary. Summary judgment is improper if the moving party fails to carry its burden but if it succeeds then the non moving party must come forward with evidence establishing the existence of a genuine issue of material fact.

Gill sought and we granted transfer gill v. Evansville sheet metal works inc 940 n e 2d 328 330 ind. 60 years of experience the latest in laser waterjet and other cnc cutting technologies make esmw your best choice for custom metal fabrication. Evansville sheet metal works inc.

Evansville sheet metal works inc 970 n e 2d 633 637 ind. Gill appealed the trial court s ruling that the csor barred her contractor negligence claim and the court of appeals affirmed. Evansville sheet metal works inc 970 n e 2d 633 637 ind. Citing to older indiana cases the court stated.

Indiana case law defines fixtures and the best discussion comes from the indiana supreme court in gill v. Appellant plaintiff sharon gill sharon on her own behalf and on behalf of the estate of her husband gale gill gale appeals the trial court s grant of appellee defendant s evansville sheet metal works inc. Evansville sheet metal works 970 n e 2d 633 ind. Esmw motion for summary judgment with respect to sharon s complaint that gale had been exposed to asbestos and.

We are asked to consider whether summary judgment for esmw on gill s negligence claim was proper. Summary judgment is improper if the movant fails to carry its burden but if it succeeds then the nonmoving party must come forward with evidence establishing the existence of a genuine issue of material fact. It has long been settled that a preemption analysis begins with the presumption that. Esmw allegedly worked as a contractor for al coa at a common work site with gale gill where materials containing asbestos were present and or used appellant s app.

Plaintiff claimed that her husband s death was caused by defendant s negligence in installing or removing asbestos containing materials and brought product liability and contractor negligence claims against defendant.