Skyhook Corp. v. Jasper

560 P.2d 934 (1977)

From our private database of 46,400+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Skyhook Corp. v. Jasper

New Mexico Supreme Court
560 P.2d 934 (1977)

EL

Facts

John Jasper (plaintiff), the personal representative of decedent Malvin Mack Brown, brought a wrongful-death action against Skyhook Corp. (defendant), the seller and manufacturer of a 100-foot telescoping crane rig purchased in 1968 by Brown’s employer, Electrical Product Signs, Inc. The crane had performed well for five years, causing no injuries during that time. In 1973 Brown, an apprentice sign installer, was fatally electrocuted while helping install a heavy metal signpost for a Phillips 66 gas-station sign. Brown and his boss were aware of overhead high-voltage lines on the work site. A clearly written warning on the crane indicated that the crane and its load must not be positioned within 10 feet of voltage lines. Brown and his boss had read the warning on the crane and were verbally reminded of the warning by the gas-station operator. There was a tape measure in the cab of the crane so that workers could ensure the crane was positioned far enough from electric lines. The day of the accident, Brown’s boss made a visual assessment that the crane was at least 10 feet from electric lines. Neither Brown’s boss nor Brown measured the distance to confirm the estimate was accurate. As Brown’s boss used the crane to swing the heavy pole into its hole, the pole contacted the overhead electric line. Brown, who was guiding the metal pole by hand, was fatally electrocuted. Jasper alleged Skyhook’s crane was unreasonably dangerous because Skyhook could have modified the crane with safety devices such as the insulated link or a proximity-warning device. In 1968, when Skyhook manufactured and sold its crane, no crane manufacturers installed the insulated link, a $300–$400 device that prevented electrocution by isolating the lifting hook from the lifting line and cable. Also in 1968, no crane manufacturers provided $700 proximity-warning devices on their cranes, which activated alarms if a crane approached voltage lines. Skyhook filed a motion for a directed verdict, asserting that the product warning on its crane satisfied its duty to warn of the hazards of operating near electric lines. The lower court granted the motion for a directed verdict, ruling in favor of Skyhook. Jasper appealed, and the appellate court reversed the lower court’s directed verdict. The state supreme court issued a writ of certiorari to review the lower courts’ decisions.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Oman, C.J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,400 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership