FARMERS UNION GRAIN TERM v M P C

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

No. 83-433 I N THE SUPREILE: COURT OF THE STATE OF M N A A O T N 1985 FARbERS U N I O N G R A I N TERMINAL ASSOCIATION, a c o r p o r a t i o n , P l a i n t i f f and A p p e l l a n t , M N A A P W R COMPANY, a O T N O E corporation, Defendant and Respondent. APPEAL FROM: D i s t r i c t Court of t h e Tenth J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , I n a n d f o r t h e County o f J u d i t h B a s i n , The H o n o r a b l e LeRoy McKinnon, J u d g e p r e s i d i n g . COUNSEL O RECORD: F For Appellant: Marra, Wenz, J o h n s o n Great F a l l s , Montana & Ilopkins; H-ekfi- J e n s e n , 1 ~ ~ c t x s F o r Respondent : J a r d i n e , S t e p h e n s o n , B l e w e t t & Weaver; K e i t h T o k e r u d , Great F a l l s , Montana - - S u b m i t t e d on B r i e f s : Decided: Filed: - Lr t \?N' i Jan. Jul\l 'r 7985 1'385 Clerk 31, - - 1985 Mr. J u s t i c e F r e d J . Weber d e l i v e r e d t h e O p i n i o n o f t h e C o u r t . F a r m e r s Union G r a i n T e r m i n a l A s s o c i a t i o n judgment following (Montana Power) jury verdict for (GTA) a p p e a l s a Montana Power Co. i n t h e D i s t r i c t Court o f t h e Tenth J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , J u d i t h B a s i n County. W e affirm. The i s s u e s p r e s e n t e d on a p p e a l a r e : 1. the jury Was t h e e v i d e n c e s u f f i c i e n t t o r e q u i r e a r e v e r s a l o f f i n d i n g t h a t Montana Power's n e g l i g e n c e was n o t a p r o x i m a t e c a u s e o f t h e f i r e t h a t d e s t r o y e d t h e GTA e l e v a t o r ? 2. Did the trial court h a m p e r i n g t h e GTA e x p e r t ' s commit reversible error by testimony a s t o t h e cause of t h e fire? 3. Did t h e t r i a l c o u r t e r r i n g i v i n g two j u r y i n s t r u c - t i o n s t o which G A o b j e c t e d ? T The GA T grain miles was located at Coffee Creek, miles Montana, about Denton. The e l e v a t o r was c r i b b e d c o n s t r u c t i o n , which means t h a t t h e wooden 15 elevator from Stanford and 7 from 2 x 6 ' s and 2 x 4 ' s w e r e l a i d on t h e f l a t s i d e , o n e on t o p o f t h e o t h e r and n a i l e d t o g e t h e r . This is a common form o f g r a i n e l e v a t o r c o n s t r u c t i o n . Electrical Montana Power furnished through 110-220 transformer, which volt to a the e l e v a t o r 5 was single-phase power, furnished and furnished transformer, through 208 v o l t power by which a three-phase for l a r g e r mo- The e l e c t r i c service l i n e s e n t e r e d t h r o u g h t h e r o o f o f tors. the service s c a l e room and r a n t h r o u g h a m e t e r b a s e i n t o w h i c h t h e Montana Power m e t e r was p l u g g e d and t h e n i n t o t h e main b r e a k - e r box. The m e t e r and b r e a k e r box w e r e l o c a t e d on t h e w e s t w a l l of t h e s c a l e room a n d t h e r e w e r e v a r i o u s o t h e r e l e c t r i - c a l boxes l o c a t e d a l o n g t h a t w e s t w a l l . The Montana Power e v i d e n c e e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t t h e Montana Power w i r e s a t t a c h e d t o t h e GTA w i r e s on t h e o u t s i d e o f t h e elevator, so that the w i r e w e s t wall of the room and c o n d u i t which t o t h e meter base ran down t h e belonged t o GTA. Although t h e m e t e r b e l o n g e d t o Montana Power, t h e m e t e r b a s e belonged to GTA. The evidence also established that the c o n d u i t , w i r e , v a r i o u s b r e a k e r b o x e s and e l e c t r i c a l e q u i p m e n t located i n the s c a l e room b e l o n g e d t o GTA w i t h t h e s i n g l e exception of t h e e l e c t r i c meter. On t h e weekend p r i o r t o Monday, J u l y 3 0 , 1 9 7 9 , a l i g h t ening storm positive occurred proof, in various the Coffee witnesses Creek area. assumed Without lightening had s t r u c k t h e GTA e l e v a t o r o r i n i t s v i c i n i t y , c a u s i n g s i g n i f i c a n t damage t o t h e e l e c t r i c m e t e r l o c a t e d i n t h e s c a l e room. E v i d e n c e e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t t h e r e had been a f i r e i n t h e s c a l e room t h a t had r e s u l t e d i n some b u r n i n g a l o n g t h e w a l l s . addition, a c a r d b o a r d box o f l i g h t bulbs on t h e In f l o o r had burned. On Monday, J u l y 3 0 , M r . Pemberton, a lineman f o r Montana Power, came t o t h e e l e v a t o r t o r e a d t h e m e t e r . a s a lineman i n t h i s a r e a f o r many y e a r s . H e had worked The e l e v a t o r was n o t o p e r a t i n g a t t h a t t i m e , a s t h e p r i o r t e n a n t had t e r m i n a t ed i t s l e a s e and GTA had n o t y e t begun o p e r a t i n g t h e e l e v a tor. D u r i n g t h i s p e r i o d , t h e e l e v a i o r was e s s e n t i a l l y empty of grain. Mr. Pemberton looked a t t h e meter and saw t h a t it had b e e n damaged, was u n r e a d a b l e and had t o be r e p l a c e d . a l s o n o t i c e d t h e r e had been a f i r e i n t h e c a r d b o a r d box. He Mr. Pemberton t e s t i f i e d he saw no damage t o a n y o f t h e e l e c t r i c a l equipment except the m e t e r , although he d i d n o t check the r e s t o f t h e e q u i p m e n t , which was owned by GTA. L a t e r t h a t day M r . bulk plant near the Pemberton r e c e i v e d a r e p o r t t h a t t h e elevator had no electric power. He d e t e r m i n e d t h a t t h e s m a l l e r t r a n s f o r m e r which s e r v e d b o t h t h e e l e v a t o r and t h e b u l k p l a n t had t r i p p e d o u t . H e reset t h e t r a n s f o r m e r on Monday and o r d e r e d a r e p l a c e m e n t m e t e r , which was n e v e r i n s t a l l e d . From Monday t o F r i d a y o f t h a t week, a number o f t h e p r i o r t e n a n t ' s and GTA's employees w e r e i n t h e elevator. On F r i d a y , August 3 , 1979, a f t e r r e c e i v i n g a r e p o r t t h a t the l a r g e r t r a n s f o r m e r had Pemberton three-phase reset the power. a red larger light showing on i t , M r . transformer, which furnished Within a r e l a t i v e l y s h o r t t i m e a f t e r t h e r e s e t t i n g o f t h a t t r a n s f o r m e r , t h e e l e v a t o r was r e p o r t e d t o Essentially a l l of the elevator, including the be on f i r e . s c a l e room and a l l t h e e l e c t r i c a l e q u i p m e n t i n it w e r e destroyed. The testimony of various witnesses as to their o b s e r v a t i o n s b e f o r e t h e f i r e and t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h a t e v i d e n c e by t h e e x p e r t s o f b o t h s i d e s c o n s t i t u t e d t h e e v i dence a s t o t h e cause o f t h e f i r e . Following a jury t r i a l , a s p e c i a l v e r d i c t was r e t u r n e d i n d i c a t i n g t h a t t h e j u r y found t h a t t h e Montana Power Company was n e g l i g e n t , b u t t h a t t h e n e g l i g e n c e o f Montana Power was n o t a p r o x i m a t e c a u s e o f t h e damage t o G T A ' s e l e v a t o r . r e s u l t , judgment was e n t e r e d f o r Montana Power. As a GTA a p p e a l s . Was t h e e v i d e n c e s u f f i c i e n t t o r e q u i r e a r e v e r s a l o f t h e j u r y f i n d i n g t h a t Montana P o w e r ' s n e g l i g e n c e was n o t a p r o x i mate c a u s e o f t h e f i r e t h a t d e s t r o y e d t h e GTA e l e v a t o r ? GTA a r g u e s t h a t overwhelming e v i d e n c e e s t a b l i s h e d that t h e f i r e was c a u s e d by t h e r e s t o r a t i o n o f e l e c t r i c i t y by t h e Moiltana Power l i n e m a n . GTA b a s e s t h e expert testimony of D r . trical engineering Bernstein's from credentials i t s p r i m a r y argument upon Bernstein, a professor of elec- t h e University of were with extensive Wisconsin. regard Dr. to his e x p e r i e n c e i n t h e t h e o r y o f e l e c t r i c i t y , h i s work i n r e v i s i n g electrical codes, investigating approximately 100 fires r e l a t i n g t o e l e c t r i c a l c a u s e s , and t e s t i f y i n g i n a p p r o x i m a t e l y 20 t r i a l s on b e h a l f o f b o t h p l a i n t i f f s a n d d e f e n d a n t s . addition, is he the author of various publications In about l i g h t e n i n g caused f i r e s and o t h e r c a u s e s o f e l e c t r i c a l f i r e s . In substance, D r . Montana Power B e r n s t e i n concluded t h a t t h e conduct o f t h e l i n e m a n was t h e cause o f the fire. also He i n d i c a t e d a n o t h e r p o s s i b i l i t y which w i l l b e d i s c u s s e d later. Montana Power r e l i e d on t h e t e s t i m o n y o f M r . Pemberton, t h e Montana Power l i n e m a n who had a p p r o x i m a t e l y 20 y e a r s o f experience as a lineman, including s e r v i c i n g t h e GTA e l e v a t o r . Williams, the linemen's C o - O p e r a t i v e o f Lewistown. Montana of experience Power a l s o c a l l e d M r . supervisor for Fergus Electric W i l l i a m s had a p p r o x i m a t e l y 28 Mr. y e a r s e x p e r i e n c e a s a lineman. ness electrician with 17 y e a r s Mr. 30 y e a r s o f Ronish, a p r i v a t e b u s i experience, including 11 y e a r s a s a l i n e m a n , was a l s o c a l l e d . The t e s t i m o n y o f t h e s e t h r e e w i t n e s s e s d i r e c t l y c o n t r a dicted parts of Dr. j u r y was r e q u i r e d experts and Bernstein's testimony. As a result, t o evaluate t h e testimony of determine which portions of the the the various testimony it f o u n d more b e l i e v a b l e . W h i l e GTA a r g u e s t h a t i t s e v i d e n c e was o v e r w h e l m i n g i n nature, t h a t i s not t h e standard o f review t o be applied. we pointed out i n Gunnels 1 1 8 7 , 1 1 9 1 , 38 S t . R e p . v. Hoyt (Mont. 1981), As 633 P.2d 1 4 9 2 , 1495: " W e r e v i e w t h e e v i d e n c e i n a l i g h t most f a v o r a b l e W e w i l l reverse only t o the prevailing party. where t h e r e i s a l a c k o f s u b s t a n t i a l e v i d e n c e t o s u p p o r t t h e judgment. " E v i d e n c e may b e i n h e r e n t l y weak and s t i l l b e deemed s u b s t a n t i a l , a n d s u b s t a n t i a l e v i d e n c e may c o n f l i c t with o t h e r evidence." (citations omitted) I n J a c q u e s v . Montana N a t . Guard 1325, 39 St.Rep. 1565, 1573-74, (Mont. 1 9 8 2 ) , 649 P.2d citing G a l l o w a y v. 1319, United States ( 1 9 4 3 ) , 319 U.S. (Black J., dissenting), 372, 63 S.Ct. 1077, Court agreed this Bl a c k ' s w a r n i n g o f t h e p o s s i b l e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l 8 7 L.Ed. with 1458 Justice infringements inherent i n s e t t i n g aside a jury verdict: .. "'. I b e l i e v e t h a t a v e r d i c t should be d i r e c t e d , if a t a l l , o n l y when, w i t h o u t w e i g h i n g t h e c r e d i b i l i t y of the witnesses, there is i n the e v i d e n c e no room w h a t e v e r f o r h o n e s t d i f f e r e n c e o f I opinion over t h e f a c t u a l i s s u e i n controversy. s h a l l continue t o believe t h a t i n a l l other cases a judge s h o u l d , i n o b e d i e n c e t o t h e command o f t h e S e v e n t h Amendment, n o t i n t e r f e r e w i t h t h e j u r y ' s function. Since t h i s i s a matter of high constit u t i o n a l importance, a p p e l l a t e c o u r t s should be a l e r t t o insure t h e preservation of t h i s constitut i o n a l r i g h t even t h o u g h e a c h c a s e n e c e s s a r i l y t u r n s on i t s p e c u l i a r c i r c u m s t a n c e s . ' 319 U.S. a t 407, 63 S . C t . a t 1 0 9 6 , 8 7 L.Ed. a t 1480." Our a p p e l l a t e review i s l i m i t e d t o a n a n a l y s i s o f the evidence t o determine whether t h e r e i s s u b s t a n t i a l evidence t o support t h e jury verdict. W e may reverse t h e j u r y v e r d i c t o n l y i f t h e e v i d e n c e i s s o overwhelming t h a t t h e r e i s no room for an honest difference of opinion on the issue of causation. The GTA b r i e f s c a r e f u l l y r e v i e w t h e e v i d e n c e s u b m i t t e d i n b e h a l f o f GTA. W e d o n o t f i n d it n e c e s s a r y t o r e v i e w t h a t evidence i n d e t a i l . The e v i d e n c e was e x t e n s i v e , w e l l p r e - p a r e d and c e r t a i n l y would have s u p p o r t e d a v e r d i c t f o r GTA on t h e question of proximate cause, verdict. had t h e j u r y g i v e n s u c h a However, o u r a n a l y s i s h e r e must b e d i r e c t e d t o t h e e v i d e n c e s u b m i t t e d by Montana Power. On Monday, lighter that the J u l y 30, M r . transformer bulk plant Pemberton r e s e t t h e s m a l l e r o r (single-phase had no power) electric after power. being told Pemberton's t e s t i m o n y e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t he c l i m b e d t h e p o l e o n which t h e t r a n s f o r m e r was l o c a t e d and hooked up h i s v o l t - a m m e t e r t o t h e w i r e r u n n i n g from t h e s e c o n d a r y s i d e o f the elevator. t h e transformer t o Wh.en h e looked a t t h e ammeter t o see i f t h e r e was a n y c u r r e n t p a s s i n g , h e found none and c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h e t r a n s f o r m e r had been t r i p p e d o u t . Pemberton t h e n t e s t i f i e d t h a t h e used a s t i c k t o reset t h e h a n d l e on t h e s i d e o f t h e Pemberton t e s t i - A s he r e s e t t h e t r a n s f o r m e r , transformer. f i e d t h a t h e watched h i s ammeter t o s e e what t h e e l e c t r i c a l c u r r e n t d i d a s t h e t r a n s f o r m e r was r e e n e r g i z e d . needle moved just a little, indicating to The ammeter Pemberton that power was r e s t o r e d t o t h e s e c o n d a r y l i n e , b u t a l s o i n d i c a t i n g t h a t t h e r e was no s h o r t c i r c u i t o r o t h e r a p p a r e n t f a u l t . the absence o f concluded a n y s i g n i f i c a n t amperage r e a d i n g , that t h e r e was no i n d i c a t i o n o f In Pemberton e q u i p m e n t damage t h a t r e q u i r e d f u r t h e r a n a l y s i s on h i s p a r t . Bernstein t e s t i f i e d t h a t M r . Dr. in turning on the electricity Pemberton was n e g l i g e n t after viewing the damaged meter. M r . W i l l i a m s , t h e l i n e m e n ' s s u p e r v i s o r from t h e Co-op, and M r . Ronish, t h e independent e l e c t r i c i a n , both t e s t i f i e d t h a t t h e p r o c e d u r e f o l l o w e d by Pemberton was c o r r e c t and t h a t a damaged m e t e r d o e s n o t n e c e s s a r i l y i n d i c a t e a p r o b l e m i n a n e l e c t r i c system. three of All t h e Montana Power w i t n e s s e s t e s t i f i e d t h a t i f t h e r e w e r e v i s i b l e damage t o o t h e r e l e c t r i cal equipment, Pemberton saw no All then the power t e s t i f i e d t h a t except indication of t h r e e Montana reset t r a n s f o r m e r indicate a should not be turned f o r t h e e l e c t r i c meter, damage t o o t h e r e l e c t r i c a l Power w i t n e s s e s testified on. he equipment. that when the " h e l d " and t h e r e was no f l o w o f power t o short c i r c u i t or similar condition, the c o u l d s a f e l y a l l o w t h e power t o c o n t i n u e t o flow. lineman The t e s t i - mony by t h e Montana Power w i t n e s s e s a l s o e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t it was not the lineman's responsibility to inspect or repair e q u i p m e n t owned by t h e c u s t o m e r . The only evidence of damage to t h e main b r e a k e r box owned by GTA and l o c a t e d n e x t t o t h e m e t e r was p r e s e n t e d i n t h e testimony of M r . P a t t e r s o n and M r . Nemec. Patterson, an employee o f t h e Co-op w h i c h had o p e r a t e d t h e e l e v a t o r , t e s t i fied t h a t w h i l e h e was main breaker box and i n t h e s c a l e room, showed Nemec that h e opened GTA's there were charred T h e r e i s no t e s t i m o n y t h a t t h i s i n f o r - w i r e s on t h e i n s i d e . m a t i o n was e v e r p a s s e d on t o t h e Montana Power Company. The t e s t i m o n y e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t a GTA employee i n s t r u c t e d o n e o f t h e Co-op employees t o h i r e a n e l e c t r i c i a n t o t a k e c a r e o f m a t t e r s i n t h e s c a l e room, b u t t h i s was n o t done p r i o r t o t h e fire. R o n i s h ' s t e s t i m o n y e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t an i n d e p e n d e n t Mr. e l e c t r i c i a n was c l o s e by and a v a i l a b l e t o d o t h e work. The Montana Power w i t n e s s e s ' with the single responsible exception the for the various electric meter, components of the GTA was electrical This testimony e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t it s y s t e m i n t h e s c a l e room. was G T A ' s of testimony established t h a t , r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t o m a i n t a i n and r e p a i r t h e c o n d u i t and w i r e coming i n t o t h e s c a l e room, a n d a l l o f t h e c o n d u i t and b r e a k e r b o x e s below t h e m e t e r , i n c l u d i n g t h e b r e a k e r box i n which t h e c h a r r e d w i r e s w e r e o b s e r v e d . I n a d d i t i o n , on F r i d a y , sonnel receive inspected grain. testified burned August 3 , the elevator One of the in GTA t h a t h e t o u c h e d t h e main o u t and t o d e t e r m i n e i f a number o f GTA p e r - order to personnel, prepare Mr. it to Fredrick, s w i t c h t o see i f it was i t had t o b e r e p l a c e d . He t e s t i f i e d t h a t when he t o o k h o l d o f and b a r e l y moved t h e d o o r t o o p e n i t , t h e r e was a f l a s h and a arcing sound. lieved t h e r e was e l e c t r i c a l power Mr. Fredrick testified loud buzzing sound o r t h a t h e had n o t be- running t o t h e e l e v a t o r . When t h i s a r c i n g sound and f l a s h o c c u r r e d , h e r e a l i z e d t h e r e was e l e c t r i c a l power r u n n i n g t o t h e e l e v a t o r . He testified t h a t h e d i d n o t open a n y o f t h e o t h e r m e t e r b o x e s o r t o u c h any o f t h e o t h e r equipment. The t e s t i m o n y on t h e p a r t o f t h e GTA p e r s o n n e l was t h a t t h e y a g r e e d t o c o n t a c t someone i n o r d e r t o have t h e e l e c t r i T h e r e i s no e v i d e n c e t o e s t a b l i s h t h a t c a l system checked. e i t h e r a n e l e c t r i c i a n o r Montana Power w e r e a d v i s e d o f the a r c i n g c o n d i t i o n which t h e GTA p e r s o n n e l o b s e r v e d and h e a r d prior t o the fire. The t h r e e l i n e m e n t e s t i f y i n g f o r Montana Power e a c h emphasized t h a t t h e a r c i n g c o n d i t i o n s u f f i c i e n t l y i n d i c a t e d t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f s e r i o u s e l e c t r i c a l p r o b l e m s , and someone s h o u l d have been n o t i f i e d i m m e d i a t e l y . Pemberton Mr. also testified that after receiving a t e l e p h o n e c a l l t h a t a r e d l i g h t was lit on t h e l a r g e r t r a n s f o r m e r , h e went t o t h e e l e v a t o r on F r i d a y . w e r e t h e r e when h e a r r i v e d . No GTA p e r s o n n e l H i s testimony e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t t h e r e d w a r n i n g l i g h t on t h e t r a n s f o r m e r g o e s on u n d e r two different circumstances. First, t h e r e may b e an overload which i s n o t s u f f i c i e n t t o a c t u a l l y t r i p t h e c i r c u i t b r e a k e r and s t o p t h e f l o w o f e l e c t r i c i t y , b u t s u f f i c i e n t t o c a u s e t h e Second, t h e l i g h t w i l l g o on when a n w a r n i n g l i g h t t o go on. o v e r l o a d i s s u f f i c i e n t t o t r i p t h e c i r c u i t b r e a k e r and s t o p t h e flow o f e l e c t r i c i t y . T h a t F r i d a y , Pemberton c l i m b e d t h e p o l e on which t h e l a r g e r t r a n s f o r m e r was l o c a t e d and f o l l o w e d a p r o c e d u r e s i m i l a r t o t h a t which h e had u s e d w i t h t h e s m a l l e r t r a n s f o r m e r on Monday. He hooked h i s ammeter t o t h e l i n e coming o f f t h e s e c o n d a r y s i d e o f t h e t r a n s f o r m e r . t e r showed a s m a l l l o a d on t h e t r a n s f o r m e r . The amme- H e t h e n reset t h e t r a n s f o r m e r s u f f i c i e n t l y s o t h a t t h e l i g h t went o f f and o b s e r v e d t h e same s m a l l l o a d shown on t h e s e c o n d a r y s i d e o f the transformer. He testified that this i n d i c a t e d t o him t h a t t h e t r a n s f o r m e r had been on b e f o r e a s w e l l a s a f t e r t h e resetting. He tricity the on f u r t h e r t e s t i f i e d t h e r e was no f l o w o f elecsecondary side after the resetting. This i n d i c a t e d t o him t h a t t h e r e was no short circuit or other e l e c t r i c a l problem a t t h a t t i m e . The f o r e g o i n g a n a l y s i s was d i r e c t l y c o n t r a d i c t e d by D r . Bernstein. However, M r . W i l l i a m s and M r . Ronish b o t h t e s t i - f i e d t h a t t h e p r o c e d u r e t h a t Pemberton u s e d was c o r r e c t and safe. Both a l s o t e s t i f i e d t h a t Pemberton was w a r r a n t e d in l e a v i n g t h e s c e n e upon r e s e t t i n g t h e t r a n s f o r m e r a f t e r f i n d ing no indication of a short circuit o r other electrical problem when h i s ammeter r e g i s t e r e d no s i g n i f i c a n t r e a d i n g . A f t e r r e s e t t i n g t h e l a r g e r t r a n s f o r m e r , Pemberton went t o t h e e l e v a t o r t o i n s t a l 1 t h e new meter. However, t h e d o o r was l o c k e d and he was n o t a b l e t o g e t i n . Dr. Bernstein i n h i s t e s t i m o n y t h a t i t was emphasized i m p r o p e r t o have r e s t o r e d power t o t h e s y s t e m when t h e r e was a damaged m e t e r and t h a t cause o f t h e fire. three of the that readily the In contradiction t o t h a t testimony, a l l linemen t e s t i f i e d t h a t none t h e meter had of them had e v e r Each t e s t i f i e d t h a t it was heard o f a meter causing a f i r e . unlikely that c o u l d h a v e been a n y t h i n g t o do w i t h t h e f i r e . In h i s opinion testimony, Dr. B e r n s t e i n concluded t h a t t h e r e s e t t i n g of t h e t r a n s f o r m e r was t h e c a u s e o f t h e f i r e . However, h e a l s o gave a n a l t e r n a t e o p i n i o n which i n v o l v e d GTA personnel. Dr. Bernstein stated: "I b e l i e v e t h e f i r e s t a r t e d i n t h e g r a i n e l e v a t o r on F r i d a y , b e c a u s e M r . Pemberton r e s e t t h e t e a s e r t r a n s f o r m e r [ t h e l a r g e r t r a n s f o r m e r ] and p u t 2 0 8 v o l t s on t o t h e g r a i n e l e v a t o r . The f i r e s t a r t e d I b e l i e v e t h a t i s what s h o r t l y a f t e r he d i d t h a t . i n the started the fire. M other opinion is: y e v e n t t h a t t h e t e a s e r t r a n s f o r m e r a c t u a l l y was on a t t h e t i m e M r . Pemberton r e s e t i t , and I d o n o t b e l i e v e it was on when h e r e s e t i t , b e c a u s e h i s method o f measurement was n o t p r o p e r , I d o n ' t t h i n k he c o u l d t e l l . Then i n t h a t e v e n t t h a t it had b e e n on a l l t h e t i m e , t h e n I b e l i e v e t h e f i r e was s t a r t ed by some change i n t h e s y s t e m , when t h e p e o p l e from G A w e r e on [ s i c ] t h e g r a i n e l e v a t o r , and t h e y T moved s o m e t h i n g which c a u s e d an a r c which e v e n t u a l l y l e d t o a f i r e , and t h e f i r e was c a u s e d b e c a u s e power had b e e n l e f t on t h i s b u i l d i n g w i t h damaged equipment." With regard to Dr. Bernstein's conclusion r e s e t t i n g of t h e transformer s t a r t e d t h e f i r e , M r . that the Pemberton t e s t i f i e d t h e r e was no e x i s t i n g f a u l t o r s h o r t c i r c u i t on t h e secondary l i n e a t t h e t i m e he reset t h e l a r g e r t r a n s f o r m e r . His t e s t i m o n y on t h a t p o i n t was s u p p o r t e d by t h e o t h e r two T h e r e i s no d i s p u t e i n t h e e v i d e n c e t h a t Pemberton linemen. checked t h e s e c o n d a r y l i n e w i t h t h e ammeter and t h a t no f a u l t was i n d i c a t e d . I n a d d i t i o n , Pemberton t e s t i f i e d t h a t h e r a n e x p e r i m e n t s on t h e same l a r g e r t r a n s f o r m e r a f t e r t h e f i r e t o o k p l a c e and c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h e ammeter r e a d i n g s b e f o r e and a f t e r resetting were correct. H e r a n a f u r t h e r e x p e r i m e n t on a s i m i l a r t r a n s f o r m e r and r e a c h e d t h e same c o n c l u s i o n . T h e r e was a d i r e c t c o n t r a d i c t i o n between t h e t e s t i m o n y of D r . B e r n s t e i n and M r . Pemberton, W i l l i a m s and Ronish. The e v i d e n c e s u b m i t t e d on e a c h s i d e was e x t e n s i v e and s u f f i c i e n t i n nature t o allow t h e jury t o decide f o r e i t h e r theory of causation. Dr. Bernstein's second theory a s t o t h e cause of the f i r e i n d i c a t e d t h e p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t t h e p e o p l e from GTA moved s o m e t h i n g which c a u s e d a n a r c , which e v e n t u a l l y l e d t o t h e fire. he concluded t h a t f a u l t l a y Even u n d e r t h a t t h e o r y , w i t h Montana Power, which had l e f t t h e power on i n t h e e l e v a tor. Even i f t h e j u r y had a c c e p t e d t h a t t h e o r y , i t d o e s n o t r e q u i r e a c o n c l u s i o n t h a t Montana P o w e r ' s n e g l i g e n c e was t h e cause of t h e f i r e . The j u r y c o u l d have c o n c l u d e d t h a t it was t h e GTA employees who c a u s e d t h e problem by moving t h e i r own equipment, causing an arc, and negligently anything about t h e a r c a t t h a t t i m e . failing As a result, to do the jury c o u l d h a v e c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h e f i r e was c a u s e d by t h e a c t i o n of GTA and resulted from GTA's failure to i n f o r m Montana Power o f t h e a r c o r t o t a k e any f u r t h e r p r o t e c t i v e m e a s u r e s . After a careful review of the testimony, we conclude there was substantial evidence to support the jury verdict that the negligence of Montana Power was not the proximate cause of the fire. for an honest Clearly, the evidence established a basis difference of opinion on the question of causation. T I Did the trial court commit reversible error by hampering the GTA expert's testimony as to the cause of the fire? Montana Power's counsel made several objections during the course of Dr. Bernstein's testimony and the qualification by GTA counsel of Dr. Bernstein as an expert. Following one objection, counsel adjourned to the chambers where there was an extensive discussion of the rules of evidence. The court ultimately ruled that Dr. Bernstein could express his opinion and no limitations were placed on his testimony. GTA argues that the conduct of the trial court in considering these objections prejudiced GTA by hampering the expert's testimony. We find that the action on the part of counsel was reasonable and that the action on the part of the District Court was also reasonable. We do not find anything in the record that demonstrates prejudice to GTA. We conclude there was no error on the part of the District Court in this regard. I11 Did the trial court err in giving two jury instructions to which GTA objected? GTA's first argument is directed to Instruction No. 40, which related to the state of mind that is required before imposition of punitive damages. In substance, Instruction No. 40 provided that one who has suffered injury through the oppression, damages. " M a l i c e " was d e f i n e d annoy o r argues f r a u d o r m a l i c e o f a n o t h e r may r e c o v e r e x e m p l a r y injure, is this o r an a s importing a wish t o vex, i n t e n t t o do a wrongful in confusing light of act. Instruction GTA No. 20, which p r o v i d e d t h a t t h e n e g l i g e n c e o f GTA i s n o t t o b e considered if t h e d e s t r u c t i o n of o r wanton t h e e l e v a t o r was p r o x i m a t e l y c a u s e d by reckless misconduct by Montana "Reckless o r wanton1' was d e f i n e d a s i n t e n t i o n a l , Power. wrongful, done e i t h e r w i t h knowledge t h a t s e r i o u s i n j u r y w i l l p r o b a b l y result or with wanton GTA contends results. and reckless that disregard these of instructions possible establish d i f f e r e n t s t a n d a r d s o f c o n d u c t o r i n t e n t on t h e p a r t o f GTA and w e r e s o confusing t h a t t h e note We negligence fire, that of because Montana t h e jury concluded was did a not find proximate that cause the of the I n a s i m i l a r manner, b e c a u s e t h e 40. t h a t Montana proximate cause, No. Power jury may h a v e been m i s l e d . n e v e r r e a c h e d t h e i s s u e o f p u n i t i v e damages u n d e r I n s t r u c t i o n No. jury the jury P o w e r ' s n e g l i g e n c e was n o t t h e t h e r e i s no b a s i s f o r a p p l y i n g I n s t r u c t i o n 20 t o t h e f a c t s o f t h i s c a s e . A s w e r e a d a l l o f t h e i n s t r u c t i o n s t o g e t h e r , w e f i n d no c o n t r a d i c t i o n s o f a r a s I n s t r u c t i o n No. hold there was no prejudicial 40 i s c o n c e r n e d . error in giving We that instruction. GTA next complains g i v i n g I n s t r u c t i o n No. that the District Court erred in 24, which i n s u b s t a n c e p r o v i d e s t h a t a p e r s o n i s bound t o e x e r c i s e r e a s o n a b l e c a r e and d i l i g e n c e t o avoid l o s s and may n o t r e c o v e r f o r l o s s e s which c o u l d h a v e b e e n p r e v e n t e d by r e a s o n a b l e e f f o r t s o r e x p e n d i t u r e s on h i s part. damages Again w e n o t e t h a t t h e j u r y d i d n o t r e a c h t h e i s s u e o f because it first concluded that Montana n e g l i g e n c e was n o t a p r o x i m a t e c a u s e o f t h e f i r e . Power's GTA h a s failed to show how it could have been prejudiced by this instruction. We conclude there was no error in giving Instruction No. 24. We affirm the District Court. We concur: / '

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.