Herman v. United States

Summary

The Ninth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for the United States in an FTCA action arising from an employee’s fall on a slippery floor at a Malmstrom Air Force Base fitness center. The court held that the evidence did not establish respondeat superior or premises liability, and that the United States was not vicariously liable for the alleged negligence of the independent janitorial contractor.

Holdings

1. The United States was not liable under respondeat superior because the Hermans presented insufficient evidence that the airman was acting within the scope of her employment when she commented on the slippery floor or that addressing the condition fell within her employment duties.
2. The United States was entitled to summary judgment on the direct premises-liability claims because it did not breach its duty to use ordinary care to maintain the fitness center in a reasonably safe condition.
3. The United States was immune from vicarious liability for EMI's alleged negligence because EMI was an independent contractor, and the contractual quality-assurance inspection right did not convert EMI into a government employee.
4. Summary judgment for the United States was proper because there were no genuine issues of material fact and the district court correctly applied the substantive law.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the United States could be held liable under respondeat superior for the alleged negligence of an unidentified Air Force airman.
2. Whether the United States breached its duty of ordinary care under a premises-liability theory.
3. Whether the United States could be held vicariously liable for the negligence of EMI under the independent-contractor doctrine.

Disposition

affirmed