Carney v. Union Pacific Railroad Co.: The Illinois Supreme Court clarifies extent of liability to a subcontractor employee by an owner or general contractor
By Richard Lee Turner, Jr.
Civil Practice and Procedure,
November 2016
In its recent decision in Carney v. Union Pacific Railroad Company, the Illinois Supreme Court has offered further guidance on not only what constitutes sufficient control for purposes of liability under §414 of the Restatement, but also what is sufficient to establish duty and potential liability under the theory of “negligent hiring” of a contractor or subcontractor under Restatement (Second) of Torts §411 (1965); and, further, what is necessary to impose liability on an owner for the existence of a “dangerous condition” on the land under the Restatement (Second) of Torts §343 (1965).
Spot an error in your article? Contact Celeste Niemann at cniemann@isba.org. For information on obtaining a copy of an article, visit the ISBA Newsletters page.
Select a Different Author