Filed: Mar. 10, 2008
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED March 10, 2008 No. 07-30408 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk JESSE RONALD JORDAN, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of David Jordan, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CONSOLIDATED GRAIN & BARGE, INC., Defendant-Appellee. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana No. 2:05-CV-4027 Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER C
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED March 10, 2008 No. 07-30408 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk JESSE RONALD JORDAN, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of David Jordan, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CONSOLIDATED GRAIN & BARGE, INC., Defendant-Appellee. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana No. 2:05-CV-4027 Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CU..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED March 10, 2008 No. 07-30408 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk JESSE RONALD JORDAN, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of David Jordan, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CONSOLIDATED GRAIN & BARGE, INC., Defendant-Appellee. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana No. 2:05-CV-4027 Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* A relative of David Jordan, a worker killed when he fell off a barge and drowned, sued the owner of the facility, Consolidated Grain & Barge, Inc. The * Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. No. 07-30408 district court granted summary judgment for the defendant. We have reviewed the briefs, pertinent portions of the record, and the ap- plicable law and have heard the arguments of counsel. We agree with the con- clusion that the defendant owed no duty to Jordan under the circumstances. The summary judgment is AFFIRMED, essentially for the reasons given by the district court. 2
