Legal Opinion · Dissent

Nanninga v. Three Rivers Electric Cooperative

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

Decided February 8, 2000No. 98-4040Published

1DissentMurphy, Circuit Judge

I respectfully dissent because I believe that the district court did not err in instructing the jury on the standard of care.

The Missouri Supreme Court has made it clear that the highest standard of care does not apply in all cases brought against suppliers of electricity. If the accident causing injury did not involve “the inherently dangerous properties of electricity, *538the ‘highest degree of care’ standard which is utilized when electricity is the agent of injury is not applicable.” Pierce v. Platte-Clay Elec. Coop., 769 S.W.2d 769, 771 n. 1 (Mo.1989). In the case before the court it is not…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Pierce v. Platte-Clay Electric Cooperative, Inc.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1989
  2. Mrad v. Missouri Edison Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1983
  3. Merrick v. Southwest Electric CooperativeMissouri Court of Appeals · 1991
  4. Washburn v. Grundy Electric CooperativeMissouri Court of Appeals · 1991

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API