Dubus v. Dresser Industries

I would affirm the trial court in all respects. I concur with that said in the majority opinion except insofar as it finds a duty owed to pedestrian-appellant and imposed on appellees Johnson and Dresser by § 31-5-118, W.S.1977 (hereinafter referred to as “the statute”).1

The majority opinion correctly reasons that such duty was not imposed by § 31-5-959(a), W.S.1977. The same reasoning should result in a like determination with reference to the statute. The duty imposed by language of the statute has reference to circumstances other than those in this case. It does not impose a duty to take…