listing the elements of a negligence claim: “(1) legal duty on the part of the defendant to conform to a certain standard of conduct to protect others against unreasonable risks; (2) a breach of that duty; (3) a proximate cause between the conduct and the resulting injury; and (4) actual damages to the claimant’s person or property”
How later courts described this case
- listing the elements of a negligence claim: “(1) legal duty on the part of the defendant to conform to a certain standard of conduct to protect others against unreasonable risks; (2) a breach of that duty; (3) a proximate cause between the conduct and the resulting injury; and (4) actual damages to the claimant’s person or property”
- explaining punitive damages are submissible when defendant knows “or had reason to know that there was a high degree of probability that the action would result in injury”
- explaining “knowledge is an element that must [often] be included in a negligence instruction in order to impose the existence of the claimed duty” (footnote omitted)
- holding the basic elements of a prima facie negligence claim are duty, breach of that duty, causation, and damages
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
BILLINGS, Judge,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
I concur in the principal opinion except as to that part that declares as a matter of law that the evidence was insufficient to submit a punitive damage instruction and reversing the award of punitive damages. In my view, there was substantial evidence from which the fact finder could conclude that the negligent conduct of the defendants rose to the level of reckless indifference.
I would affirm the judgment.