Sutton v. Jondahl
Oklahoma Court of Appeals
532 P.2d 478 (1975)
- Written by Sheryl McGrath, JD
Facts
John Jondahl (defendant) gave his 10-year-old son a chemistry set as a Christmas gift in 1968. At the time, Jondahl and his family were renting a house from the Suttons (plaintiffs). About a year later, while Jondahl’s family was still renting the house, Jondahl’s son tried to experiment in his bedroom by heating some chemicals from the set using an electric popcorn popper. During this experiment, a fire ignited and caused damage to the house. The Suttons submitted a claim to their fire insurance company, Central Mutual Insurance Co. (Central Mutual) (plaintiff). Central Mutual paid the Suttons’ claim, and then Central Mutual sued Jondahl and his son in a subrogation action. The trial court instructed the jury that Jondahl and his son had to prove lack of negligence and that if Jondahl or his son failed to fulfill this proof requirement, then the jury must render a verdict for Central Mutual. In other words, the trial court’s instruction placed the burden on Jondahl and his son to prove that they were without fault. The jury found Jondahl (but not his son) liable to Central Mutual. Jondahl appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Brightmire, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 810,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.
