Douglas L. Kuper and Peggy D. Kuper, Plaintiffs and Appellees v. Lincoln-Union Electric Company, Defendant And…

Summary

The court reversed the judgment and remanded for a new trial because the jury was improperly instructed that an electric distributor owed the highest degree of care, and because the trial court improperly treated a pre-litigation investigator as a protected nontestifying expert and excluded discovery and testimony concerning his work. The court also directed that an unavoidable-accident instruction be given on retrial and required the trial court to determine whether the scientific foundation for the plaintiffs' expert testimony was reliable. The court held that the nuisance theory was unavailable because the utility's statutorily authorized activities could not constitute a nuisance under the governing statute. Justices Amundson and Gilbertson dissented from the nuisance ruling, arguing that excessive stray voltage could support a private nuisance claim.