Otte v. Dayton Power & Light Co.

In the case at bar, the jury returned a verdict finding DP&L negligently failed to warn the Ottes of the effects of stray voltage. DP&L was adjudged to be at fault to the extent of fifty-one percent of the damages. This verdict was overturned by the appellate court on the theory that because strict liability was available as a cause of action, a new trial was necessary. For the reasons articulated below, we hold strict liability1 is inapplicable under the facts of this case. Since it is not available as a cause of action against DP&L and the trial court committed no prejudicial error in the…