Beale v. Hardy, No. 84-2028

CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (4th Circuit)
Writing for the CourtBefore WIDENER and CHAPMAN, Circuit Judges and HAYNSWORTH; CHAPMAN
Citation769 F.2d 213
PartiesJames W. BEALE; et al., Appellants, and Oklahoma Sand Company; New Jersey Silica Sand Company, Defendants, v. Thomas H. HARDY; George S. Wilson, III, Administrator of the Estate of Harry P. Hardy, deceased, Individually and Trading as Hardy Sand Company, an Indiana Partnership; The Mead Corporation; Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, Third Party Defendants, v. WHITEHEAD BROTHERS COMPANY; Pennsylvania Glass Sand Corporation; Hardy Sand Company; Warner Company; Manley Brothers; Thomas H. Hardy, individually and trading as Hardy Sand Company, Appellees.
Docket NumberNo. 84-2028
Decision Date07 August 1985

Page 213

769 F.2d 213
James W. BEALE; et al., Appellants,
and
Oklahoma Sand Company; New Jersey Silica Sand Company, Defendants,
v.
Thomas H. HARDY; George S. Wilson, III, Administrator of
the Estate of Harry P. Hardy, deceased, Individually and
Trading as Hardy Sand Company, an Indiana Partnership; The
Mead Corporation; Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, Third
Party Defendants,
v.
WHITEHEAD BROTHERS COMPANY; Pennsylvania Glass Sand
Corporation; Hardy Sand Company; Warner Company;
Manley Brothers; Thomas H. Hardy,
individually and trading as
Hardy Sand Company, Appellees.
No. 84-2028.
United States Court of Appeals,
Fourth Circuit.
Argued June 3, 1985.
Decided Aug. 7, 1985.

J. Michael Gamble, Amherst, Va. (Donald G. Pendleton, Ronald D. Henderson, Pendleton & Gamble, Amherst, Va., S.J. Thompson, Jr., Gregory P. Cochran, John T. Cook, Caskie, Frost, Hobbs, Thompson, Knakal & Alford, Lynchburg, Va., John M. O'Quinn, Edwin L. McAninch, O'Quinn, Hagans & Wettman, Houston, Tex., on brief), for appellants.

James W. Morris, III, Richmond, Va. Richard K. Bennett, Caroline Loudow Lockerby, Browder, Russell, Morris & Butcher, John M. Oakey, Jr., H. Slayton Dabney, Jr., Margaret G. Seiler, Robert T. Billingsley,Mary Louise Kramer, Sands, Anderson, Marks & Miller, McGuire, Woods & Battle, Richmond, Va., on brief Colin J.S. Thomas, Jr., Bruce C. Phillips, Timberlake, Smith, Thomas & Moses, P.C., George W. Wooten, M. OLanier Woodrum, Woodivard, Fox, Wooten & Hart, William B. Poff, Samuel G. Wilson, Woods, Rogers & Hazlegrove, for appellees.

Before WIDENER and CHAPMAN, Circuit Judges and HAYNSWORTH, Senior Circuit Judge.

CHAPMAN, Circuit Judge:

Plaintiffs, past and present employees of the Lynchburg Foundry, sued twelve corporate defendants that allegedly supplied to the Lynchburg Foundry silica sand or related products used in the casting process at the foundry. Plaintiffs claimed that these defendants had a duty to warn directly the employees of the foundry of the risks and dangers of contracting silicosis by working with products containing silica. The defendants moved for summary judgment on the ground that they had no duty to warn the plaintiffs of these risks

Page 214

and dangers because the Lynchburg Foundry has been knowledgeable of the risks and dangers since at least the 1930s. The district court granted defendants' motions, Goodbar v. Whitehead Brothers, 591 F.Supp. 552 (W.D.Va.1984), and plaintiffs appealed. We affirm.

All of the parties...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1521 practice notes
  • Youssefi v. Renaud, Civil Action No. 10–cv–00428–AW.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 1st Circuit. United States District Courts. 1st Circuit. District of Massachusetts
    • March 11, 2011
    ...create a genuine dispute of material fact “through mere speculation or the building of one inference upon another.” See Beale v. Hardy, 769 F.2d 213, 214 (4th Cir.1985).D. Standards Governing Judicial Review of Statutory Interpretation by Agencies As a general matter, there is a “strong pre......
  • Moody v. City of Newport News, Civil No. 4:14cv99
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of Virginia)
    • June 16, 2016
    ...or the building of one inference upon another.’ " Othentec Ltd. v. Phelan, 526 F.3d 135, 140 (4th Cir.2008) (quoting Beale v. Hardy, 769 F.2d 213, 214 (4th Cir.1985) ).Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(c) addresses the applicable procedure for pursuing, and defending against, summary judgm......
  • Howard v. Coll. of the Albemarle, No. 2:15–CV–39–D
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. Eastern District of North Carolina
    • March 27, 2017
    ...Anderson, 477 U.S. at 249, 106 S.Ct. 2505. Conjectural arguments will not suffice. See id. at 249–52, 106 S.Ct. 2505 ; Beale v. Hardy, 769 F.2d 213, 214 (4th Cir. 1985) ("The nonmoving party ... cannot create a genuine issue of material fact through mere speculation or the building of one i......
  • Richland-Lexington Airport v. Atlas Properties, Civ. A. No. 3:92-750-21.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court of South Carolina
    • March 3, 1994
    ..."cannot create a genuine issue of material fact through mere speculation or the building of one inference upon another." Beale v. Hardy, 769 F.2d 213, 214 (4th Cir.1985). Rather, if the evidence "is so one-sided that one party must prevail as a matter of law," the court must enter summary j......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1517 cases
  • Youssefi v. Renaud, Civil Action No. 10–cv–00428–AW.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 1st Circuit. United States District Courts. 1st Circuit. District of Massachusetts
    • March 11, 2011
    ...create a genuine dispute of material fact “through mere speculation or the building of one inference upon another.” See Beale v. Hardy, 769 F.2d 213, 214 (4th Cir.1985).D. Standards Governing Judicial Review of Statutory Interpretation by Agencies As a general matter, there is a “strong pre......
  • Moody v. City of Newport News, Civil No. 4:14cv99
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of Virginia)
    • June 16, 2016
    ...or the building of one inference upon another.’ " Othentec Ltd. v. Phelan, 526 F.3d 135, 140 (4th Cir.2008) (quoting Beale v. Hardy, 769 F.2d 213, 214 (4th Cir.1985) ).Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(c) addresses the applicable procedure for pursuing, and defending against, summary judgm......
  • Howard v. Coll. of the Albemarle, No. 2:15–CV–39–D
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. Eastern District of North Carolina
    • March 27, 2017
    ...Anderson, 477 U.S. at 249, 106 S.Ct. 2505. Conjectural arguments will not suffice. See id. at 249–52, 106 S.Ct. 2505 ; Beale v. Hardy, 769 F.2d 213, 214 (4th Cir. 1985) ("The nonmoving party ... cannot create a genuine issue of material fact through mere speculation or the building of one i......
  • Richland-Lexington Airport v. Atlas Properties, Civ. A. No. 3:92-750-21.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court of South Carolina
    • March 3, 1994
    ..."cannot create a genuine issue of material fact through mere speculation or the building of one inference upon another." Beale v. Hardy, 769 F.2d 213, 214 (4th Cir.1985). Rather, if the evidence "is so one-sided that one party must prevail as a matter of law," the court must enter summary j......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT