Opinion ID: 1449306
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Duty owed

Text: Grothe was under a duty to avoid creating a situation which would pose an unreasonable risk of harm to Olafson. Nazareno v. Urie, 638 P.2d 671 (Alaska 1981). In addition, since Grothe furnished the drill which was used by Olafson, he was under the further duty to exercise reasonable care to ensure that the drill was safe for its intended use. [11] In its findings, the superior court cited several federal safety regulations originally promulgated, pursuant to the Federal Metal and Non-Metallic Mine Safety Act, 30 U.S.C.A. §§ 721-740. Thirty C.F.R. 56.14-25 directs that mining machinery and equipment should be maintained properly. Thirty C.F.R. 56.14-26 states that unsafe equipment or machinery shall be removed from service immediately. Finally, 30 C.F.R. 56.18-20 provides: Mandatory. No employee shall be assigned, or allowed, or be required to perform work alone in any area where hazardous conditions exist that would endanger his safety unless he can communicate with others, can be heard, or can be seen. The superior court did not specifically state that it found Grothe to be negligent per se for violation of these regulations. Since the court phrased its conclusions of negligence in the language of the regulations, however, it seems the superior court did adopt the regulatory provisions as the applicable standard of care in this case. Assuming that Grothe's excavation is subject to the federal regulations and applying the criteria of Ferrell v. Baxter, 484 P.2d 250, 263 (Alaska 1971), and Bailey v. Lenord, 625 P.2d 849, 856 (Alaska 1981), we conclude that the superior court could properly adopt 30 C.F.R. 56.14-26 (unsafe equipment shall be removed) and 30 C.F.R. 56.18-20 (employee shall not be left alone in hazardous work conditions) as codified standards of due care. [12]