Wirth v. Mayrath Industries, Inc.
Decision Date | 09 May 1979 |
Docket Number | No. 9580,9580 |
Citation | 278 N.W.2d 789 |
Parties | Linda WIRTH, Individually and as a Personal Representative of the Estate of Larry Wirth, Deceased, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. MAYRATH INDUSTRIES, INC., Defendant, and Cavalier Rural Electric Cooperative, Inc., Defendant and Appellee. Civ. |
Court | North Dakota Supreme Court |
O'Grady & Morley, Grand Forks, and Cameron D. Sillers, Langdon, for plaintiff and appellant; appearance by Cameron D. Sillers, Langdon; argued by Lowell A. O'Grady, Grand Forks.
Vaaler, Gillig, Warcup, Woutat & Zimney, Grand Forks, for defendant Mayrath Industries; no appearance.
Dahl & Greenagel, Grafton, for defendant and appellee Cavalier Rural Electric Cooperative, Inc.; argued by Robert E. Dahl, Grafton.
The plaintiff, Linda Wirth, individually and as the personal representative of the estate of Larry Wirth, deceased, appeals to our court from the order of the district court, dated October 20, 1978, which struck Count V alleging strict liability from the complaint. 1 We affirm.
Linda's statement of the case follows:
Part 7 of Linda's statement of the case is clarified by the trial court's memo:
Linda relies on Sections 402A, 519, and 520 of the Restatement of Torts 2d 2 for her argument that the concept of strict liability applies to R.E.C. in this action.
In discussing the cases relied upon by the trial court, counsel for Linda asserts that only Kemp and Williams discuss the liability of the defendant under Section 402(a). He states that both cases concluded that since the electricity in question had not passed through a customer's meter, there could be no recovery under Section 402(a), and he asserts that the cases overlook that before there can be a sale to the customer, the utility must provide the means or service to the customer's meter. He contends that the situation is analogous to hospital blood cases and refers us to the case of Johnson v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 355 F.Supp. 1065, 1066-67 (E.D.Wis.1973):
Counsel further quotes from Johnson in support of his contention that strict liability should apply in this case for the same reasons that the court urged it should apply in hospital service cases.
Johnson is distinguishable from the present case inasmuch as there has been no showing of a defective service in the instant case.
Counsel for Linda asserts that the standard charge for burying line underground is $200, that this is the charge that was made subsequent to the incident which resulted in Larry Wirth's death in this case and inferentially, that because of this small cost the line should have been initially buried by the cooperative, and that as the line was not buried and the death occurred, the rural electric cooperative should bear the economic cost of the death because it can spread the loss among its 1800 members. Counsel asserts that this is a rational approach which should be applied in cases such as this.
What counsel is asking us to do is to legislate. He refers us to a recent decision of the Minnesota Supreme Court entitled Ferguson v. Northern States Power Co., 307 Minn. 26, 239 N.W.2d 190 (1976), asserting that the court came within an eyelash of holding the power company strictly liable.
The...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Mehl v. Canadian Pacific Ry., Ltd.
...or abnormally dangerous activities. See Ehlis v. Shire Richwood, Inc., 233 F.Supp.2d 1189, 1191 (D.N.D.2002); Wirth v. Mayrath Indus., 278 N.W.2d 789, 792-93 (N.D.1979)(declining to adopt Restatement (Second) Torts §§ 519 and In Scottsbluff, the Eighth Circuit was faced with a similar stric......
-
Schriner v. Pennsylvania Power & Light Co.
...determination--that electricity can not be considered a product--in either of the two remaining cases cited by PP & L: Wirth v. Mayrath Industries, Inc., 278 N.W.2d 789 (N.D.1979) and Ferguson v. Northern States Power Company, 307 Minn. 26, 239 N.W.2d 190 In Ransome v. Wisconsin Electric Po......
-
United Pacific Co. v. Southern Cal. Edison Co.
...(1974) 114 N.H. 182, 317 A.2d 576; Farina v. Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. (1981) 81 A.D.2d 700, 438 N.Y.S.2d 645; Wirth v. Mayrath Industries, Inc. (N.Dak.1979) 278 N.W.2d 789; Erwin v. Guadalupe Valley Electric Co-Op. (Tex.Civ.App.1974) 505 S.W.2d 353; Kemp v. Wisc. Elec. Power Co. (1969) 44......
-
Buckles v. BH Flowtest, Inc.
...North Dakota has not adopted strict liability for workers engaged in inherently dangerous activities, see Wirth v. Mayrath Indus. , 278 N.W. 2d 789, at 792-93 (N.D. 1979) (declining to adopt §§ 519 and 520 of the Restatement (Second) of Torts regarding strict liability for abnormally danger......