Abstract
This Note has several objectives. First, it outlines how the Hooper court used parts of the Woodson interpretation to conclude that the work in which the plaintiff's decedent was involved did not fall within the inherently dangerous exception. Next, it traces the origins of the doctrine itself, and how it has evolved in other jurisdictions as well as in North Carolina. The Note analyzes some criticisms of the doctrine, predicting what may become of it in the future. Additionally, this Note analyzes the Hooper court's decision by comparing it to the Woodson analysis, as well as to the definitions and trends of other jurisdictions, in order to determine whether the Hooper decision was the correct one. Finally, this Note outlines possible future trends in North Carolina tort law in the wake of this decision.
Recommended Citation
Mary Margaret McEachern, Inherently Dangerous or Inherently Difficult? Interpretations and Criticisms of Imposing Vicarious Liability on General Contractors for Injuries Suffered as a Result of Work Performed by Independent Contractors: Hooper v. Pizzagalli Construction Company, 17 Campbell L. Rev. 483 (1995).