Court Opinion

ID: 9672789
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 04:00:19.792577+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:16:18.336307
License: Public Domain

Cavanagh, J.
(dissenting). We dissent for the reason that, when the jury instructions are read as a whole, it is clear that the jurors were apprised of the proper standard of conduct. Specifically, the trial court correctly instructed that negligence is the
"failure to do something which a reasonably careful person would do or the doing of something which a reasonably careful person would not do under the circumstances which you find existed in this case. * * * The law with respect to negligence is complied with when an electric company or others engaged in the transmission or use of electricity provide such protection as will safely guard against any contingency that is reasonably anticipated”. (Emphasis added.)
Moreover, plaintiff did not object to the jury instructions given on the basis of the standard of conduct. Rather, plaintiff objected on the basis of the standard of care. However, as the majority *188makes clear, the latter standard was the subject of proper instruction.
Accordingly, we would affirm the judgment of the Court of Appeals.
Ryan and Boyle, JJ., concurred with Cavanagh, J.