disapproving Jackson v. Blue Flame Gas Co., 90 Idaho 393, 412 P.2d 418 (1966)
How later courts described this case
- disapproving Jackson v. Blue Flame Gas Co., 90 Idaho 393, 412 P.2d 418 (1966)
- noting “we fail to see any logical reason to distinguish between the two”
- applying comments h and n
- in evaluating duty to warn, obviousness of danger is a jury question
Written by the judges who cited it.
Distinguished
Distinguished by Inland Group of Companies, Inc. v. Providence Washington Insurance Co., 133 Idaho 249 (1999)
Although G & L had not yet executed a lease for their new building, we conclude that both Rindlisbaker and Circle C Ranch are distinguishable from this case.
The opinion
McQUADE, Justice
(specially concurring).
I concur in the reasoning of the majority opinion, but it must be emphasized that the majority specifically finds that the judgment of $415,000 was not excessive. The action is only remanded to determine whether certain evidence concerning future earnings had an impact on the verdict. Upon remand the trial court can properly find that there was sufficient evidence to support the verdict regardless of the “speculative” evidence.