Mathie v. Montana Power Co.

Montana Supreme Court

Mathie v. Montana Power Co.

DecidedJune 12, 1975

Docket12922

StatusPublished

This text of Mathie v. Montana Power Co. (Mathie v. Montana Power Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Montana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Mathie v. Montana Power Co., (Mo. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

No. 12922

I N T E SUPREME C U T O T E STATE O M N A A H OR F H F OTN

V I R G I N I A MATHIE,

P l a i n t i f f and A p p e l l a n t ,

-vs - THE M N A A P W R C M A Y e t a l . , OTN O E O PN

Defendants and Respondents,

Appeal from: D i s t r i c t Court o f t h e S i x t h J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , Honorable J a c k D. Shanstrom, Judge p r e s i d i n g .

Counsel o f Record:

For ~ ~ ~ e i l: a n t

McKeon and Skakles , Anaconda, Montana Gregory J. Skakles argued, Anaconda, Montana

F o r Respondent :

C o r e t t e , Smith and Dean, B u t t e , Montana Kendrick Smith argued, B u t t e , Montana

Submitted: May 5, 1975

Decided: dub 1 2 $!#I Filed: Ji'nW 1.2 1973 Mr. J u s t i c e John Conway H a r r i s o n d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion of t h e Court . T h i s i s a n a p p e a l by p l a i n t i f f V i r g i n i a Mathie from a n o r d e r of t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t , Park County, t h e Hon. J a c k Shanstrom,

judge p r e s i d i n g , g r a n t i n g summary judgment i n a p e r s o n a l i n j u r y

a c t i o n t o d e f e n d a n t Montana Power Company.

P l a i n t i f f i s t h e mother o f one Ronnie C h a r l e s H a r r i s who

w a s f a t a l l y i n j u r e d on J u n e 2 1 , 1973, w h i l e employed by t h e Brogan Sand and G r a v e l Company. The amended c o m p l a i n t a l l e g e d t h e d e a t h

was c a u s e d by t h e n e g l i g e n c e o f d e f e n d a n t Montana Power Company

and d e f e n d a n t s A , B , and C , (never i d e n t i f i e d ) . Several allega-

t i o n s of n e g l i g e n c e were a l l e g e d a s t o t h e Power Company: (1) I t n e g l i g e n t l y a d v i s e d t h e owner of t h e Sand and

G r a v e l Company a s t o t h e p r o p e r method of grounding and w i r i n g

t h e c r u s h e r , on which d e c e d e n t was working on o r a t .

(2) I t was n e g l i g e n t i n s u p p l y i n g e l e c t r i c i t y t o t h e

c r u s h e r when i t knew, o r s h o u l d have known, t h a t t h e c r u s h e r was

i m p r o p e r l y w i r e d and grounded and w a s d a n g e r o u s t o t h o s e who came

i n contact with it.

(3) That d e f e n d a n t Power Company f a i l e d t o p r o p e r l y i n -

s p e c t t h e w i r i n g , grounding and t h e e l e c t r i c a l equipment of t h e

Brogan Sand and G r a v e l Company and was n e g l i g e n t i n s u p p l y i n g e l e c t r i c i t y w i t h o u t p r o p e r i n s p e c t i o n of t h e e l e c t r i c a l g r o u n d i n g s ,

w i r i n g s and a p p l i a n c e s .

(4) That i f t h e Power Company d i d i n s p e c t t h e g r o u n d i n g s ,

w i r i n g and e l e c t r i c a l a p p l i a n c e s , it knew o r s h o u l d have known of t h e dangerous c o n d i t i o n s p r e s e n t e d t o Ronnie Harris and i t was t h e r e f o r e n e g l i g e n t i n s u p p l y i n g e l e c t r i c i t y , i n view of t h e d e - f e c t i v e c o n d i t i o n of t h e g r o u n d i n g , w i r i n g and a p p l i a n c e s . (5) That t h e Power Company's n e g l i g e n c e w a s t h e p r o x i m a t e c a u s e of t h e d e a t h o f H a r r i s . --- - *_ The o n l y t e s t i m o n y i n t h e r e c o r d i s t h e d e p o s i t i o n of - r'

i- Welch Brogan, owner of t h e g r a v e l p i t , f o r whom H a r r i s w a s working. P l a i n t i f f t o o k t h e d e p o s i t i o n and p l a i n t i f f t a k e s no i s s u e w i t h B r o g a n ' s t e s t i m o n y .

A r e a d i n g of B r o g a n ' s t e s t i m o n y r e v e a l e d t h a t he had

o p e r a t e d a s a s m a l l g r a v e l company a t Corwin S p r i n g s , Montana, s i n c e 1952. He p u r c h a s e d t h e c r u s h e r i n v o l v e d i n t h e a c c i d e n t

i n e i t h e r 1956 o r 1957 and a t t h e t i m e of p u r c h a s e it was a d i e s e l

o p e r a t e d e n g i n e which he p e r s o n a l l y c o n v e r t e d t o e l e c t r i c i t y , w i t h t h e h e l p of h i s employees. Brogan d i d n o t know t h e e x a c t d a t e of c o n v e r s i o n b u t a n e x h i b i t , a c o n t r a c t w i t h t h e Montana Power

Company t o f u r n i s h e l e c t r i c s e r v i c e , was d a t e d May 7 , 1956. He

t e s t i f i e d t h a t t h e l a s t time defendant energized t h e l i n e , brought a b o u t by a highway change c a u s i n g c e r t a i n p o l e s t o be changed, o c c u r r e d i n 1968 and a t t h a t t i m e d e f e n d a n t p u t i n a s e r v i c e p o l e

on h i s p r o p e r t y and he p e r s o n a l l y grounded t h e c r u s h e r . Further,

t h a t t h e Power Company men were " p r o b a b l y " t h e r e a t t h e t i m e of t h e

grounding b u t t h a t t h e y had n o t h i n g t o d o w i t h t h e grounding of

t h e c r u s h e r n o r d i d h e a s k them how t o do i t . He t h o u g h t t h a t de-

f e n d a n t Power Company knew how t h e c r u s h e r was grounded, b u t t h a t

a l l t h e w i r i n g on t h e c r u s h e r s i d e of t h e power p o l e was h i s , and t h a t he d i d a l l t h e work.

From t h e i n t e r r o g a t o r i e s propounded by b o t h p a r t i e s and

t h e a c c i d e n t r e p o r t s of d e f e n d a n t and t h e Montana Workmen's Com-

p e n s a t i o n D i v i s i o n , t h e f a c t s of t h e a c c i d e n t a r e found. On t h e

day i n v o l v e d Ronnie Harris and a man named John A r a b i a were work- i n g i n t h e g r a v e l p i t and o p e r a t i n g t h e c r u s h e r . H a r r i s was on t h e machine and A r a b i a was o p e r a t i n g a f r o n t end l o a d e r w i t h which he was l o a d i n g g r a v e l from t h e p i t i n t o a hopper on t h e end of the crusher. A f t e r f i l l i n g t h e hopper A r a b i a c o u l d n o t s e e H a r r i s

on t h e c r u s h e r and t h i n k i n g he had wandered away from t h e s i t e ,

he g o t o f f t h e l o a d e r and went o v e r t o t h e c r u s h e r t o engage a c l u t c h t o s t a r t t h e machine. When h e s t a r t e d up a l a d d e r on t h e

c r u s h e r he g o t a shock and c a l l e d t o have t h e power t u r n e d o f f .

S h o r t l y t h e r e a f t e r Harris was found l y i n g i n a s m a l l p o o l of water near t h e crusher. An a u t o p s y r e v e a l e d H a r r i s had d i e d of drowning and t h e r e were no s i g n s o f any e l e c t r i c a l b u r n s on h i s

body. On t h e b a s i s of t h e h e r e t o f o r e r e l a t e d f a c t s and p l e a d -

i n g s , Judge Shanstrom g r a n t e d summary judgment t o d e f e n d a n t Power Company.

P l a i n t i f f sets f o r t h o n l y o n e i s s u e on appeal--Did the

c o u r t err i n g r a n t i n g summary judgment?

T h i s C o u r t h a s r e p e a t e d l y u p h e l d summary judgments where

t h e r e c o r d d i s c l o s e s no g e n u i n e i s s u e a s t o any m a t e r i a l f a c t ,

h o l d i n g t h a t t h e burden i s on t h e o p p o s i n g p a r t y t o p r e s e n t e v i - d e n c e r a i s i n g t h e f a c t s of a m a t e r i a l and s u b s t a n t i a l n a t u r e . State Mont . of Montana e x r e l . C i t y Motor Co., I n c . v . D i s t . C O U ~ P~. ~ O I T

486, 32 St.Rep. 34, 36; S t a t e ex r e l . B u r l i n g t o n N o r t h e r n , I n c .

v. D i s t . C t . , 159 Mont. 295, 496 P.2d 1152; DeWinter v. Capp Homes, Inc., 162 Ivlont.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI