Robin Earl Marler and Rebecca Gail Marler v. Frank A. Dunn and Erna M. Dunn

Eighth Circuit

Robin Earl Marler and Rebecca Gail Marler v. Frank A. Dunn and Erna M. Dunn

763 F.2d 968

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedJuly 2, 1985

Docket84-2177

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 763 F.2d 968 (Robin Earl Marler and Rebecca Gail Marler v. Frank A. Dunn and Erna M. Dunn) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Robin Earl Marler and Rebecca Gail Marler v. Frank A. Dunn and Erna M. Dunn, 763 F.2d 968 (8th Cir. 1985).

Pincite

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

Appellants Robin and Rebecca Marler brought this action against appellees Frank and Erna Dunn for the wrongful death of their infant son. The jury returned a verdict for the Marlers for $90,000. The court¹ granted the Dunns’ motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and the Marlers now appeal.

In 1982 a fire destroyed the house the Marlers rented from the Dunns. One of the Marlers’ sons died in the fire. The fire was determined to have been caused by an electrical arc in a wall outlet. The Marlers’ theory at trial was that the Dunns knew or, by exercising ordinary care, should have known of the faulty wiring which created the condition for an arc to occur, but negligently failed to repair it. They asserted that the Dunns retained control over the house and, consequently, had a duty to inspect and maintain it. In support, they introduced evidence that the Dunns’ agent retained a key to the house and told the Marlers “to let her know if [they] had any problems.” They also introduced the rental agreement in which the Dunns reserved the right, after first notifying the Marlers, “to inspect inside and outside property at least once a month if found necessary.” The jury returned a verdict for the Marlers.

After the verdict was returned, the Dunns moved for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. The court granted the motion, ruling that the evidence presented was insufficient as a matter of law to establish that the Dunns could have known of the faulty wiring by using ordinary care. We have carefully reviewed the record in this case and affirm the judgment of the district court granting judgment notwithstanding the verdict on the basis of its memorandum opinion.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellants Robin and Rebecca Marler brought this action against appellees Frank and Erna Dunn for the wrongful death of their infant son. The jury returned a verdict for the Marlers for $90,000. The court¹ granted the Dunns’ motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and the Marlers now appeal.

In 1982 a fire destroyed the house the Marlers rented from the Dunns. One of the Marlers’ sons died in the fire. The fire was determined to have been caused by an electrical arc in a wall outlet. The Marlers’ theory at trial was that the Dunns knew or, by exercising ordinary care, should have known of the faulty wiring which created the condition for an arc to occur, but negligently failed to repair it. They asserted that the Dunns retained control over the house and, consequently, had a duty to inspect and maintain it. In support, they introduced evidence that the Dunns’ agent retained a key to the house and told the Marlers “to let her know if [they] had any problems.” They also introduced the rental agreement in which the Dunns reserved the right, after first notifying the Marlers, “to inspect inside and outside property at least once a month if found necessary.” The jury returned a verdict for the Marlers.

After the verdict was returned, the Dunns moved for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. The court granted the motion, ruling that the evidence presented was insufficient as a matter of law to establish that the Dunns could have known of the faulty wiring by using ordinary care. We have carefully reviewed the record in this case and affirm the judgment of the district court granting judgment notwithstanding the verdict on the basis of its memorandum opinion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

763 F.2d 968, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robin-earl-marler-and-rebecca-gail-marler-v-frank-a-dunn-and-erna-m-dunn-ca8-1985.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack