Pansy Blackwell v. Jim Hohn

United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 00-1312
___________
Eric W. Smith, *
*
Plaintiff-Appellee, *
*
v. *
*
Chevron Chemical Company, Inc., a *
foreign corporation, *
*
Defendant Third Party *
Plaintiff-Appellant, *
*
v. *
*
Montana-Dakota Utilities, Inc., a *
division of MDU Resources Group, *
Inc., *
*
Third Party Defendant- *
Appellee. *
____________ * Appeals from the United States
* District Court for the District of
Chemical Manufacturers Association, * South Dakota.
*
Amicus on Behalf of * [UNPUBLISHED]
Appellant. *
__________
No. 00-1491
__________

-- 1 of 3 --

-2-
Eric W. Smith, *
*
Plaintiff, *
*
v. *
*
Chevron Chemical Company, Inc., a *
foreign corporation, *
*
Defendant Third Party *
Plaintiff-Appellee, *
*
v. *
*
Montana-Dakota Utilities, Inc., a *
division of MDU Resources Group, *
Inc., *
*
Third Party Defendant- *
Appellant. *
____________ *
*
Chemical Manufacturers Association, *
*
Amicus on Behalf of *
Appellant. *
___________
Submitted: December 13, 2000
Filed: December 19, 2000
___________
Before McMILLIAN, FAGG, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.

-- 2 of 3 --

-3-
Eric W. Smith was injured by an explosion and fire that occurred while he was
fusing a high-volume tapping tee to a pressurized gas pipeline in South Dakota. Smith
brought this diversity lawsuit against the tee's manufacturer, Chevron Chemical
Company, Inc., alleging negligence and strict liability. Chevron brought third party
claims against the pipeline's owner and operator, Montana-Dakota Utilities, Inc., for
failure to comply with federal regulations and for negligent training and supervision.
Following a trial, a jury returned a verdict in Smith's favor, finding Chevron 90% at
fault and Montana Dakota 10% at fault. The jury awarded $300,000 in compensatory
damages and $600,000 in punitive damages.
On appeal, Chevron asserts the district court committed error in submitting the
question of punitive damages to the jury, in denying its motion for a new trial alleging
the court erroneously admitted hearsay evidence of other accidents, in admitting expert
testimony, and in granting Montana Dakota's motion instead of Chevron's motion for
summary judgment on the "sophisticated user doctrine." On cross-appeal, Montana
Dakota contends the district court committed error in denying its motion for summary
judgment on Chevron's contribution claim. Having carefully reviewed the record, we
conclude the district court made no reversible errors and thus affirm this state-law
diversity case for the reasons stated in the district court's memorandum opinions and
orders. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
A true copy.
Attest:
CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.

-- 3 of 3 --