Johnson v. Lull Enterprises, Inc.

11 SAUNDERS, Judge,

dissenting.

In this case, the majority affirms a jury’s erroneous conclusion that a tort victim can be held 100% responsible for injuries resulting at least in part from defendant’s knowing failure to provide him with a safe piece of heavy machinery.

It does so on two grounds: defendant had no duty to plaintiff to furnish a piece of heavy machinery equipped with a seat belt, because plaintiff was not a party to the contract requiring same; and the jury was not wrong in concluding that, even had seat belts been furnished, plaintiff would not have worn them since he frequently…