Abbott v. Missouri Gas Energy
2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 802
Mo. Ct. App.2012Background
- Graeme Abbott sustained severe burns when a ThyssenKrupp furnace exploded during repair.
- Missouri Gas Energy (MGE) had previously received a gas odor call from ThyssenKrupp and sent Crawford to investigate.
- Crawford reported the area safe after his investigation; Abbott and his wife sued MGE for negligence and punitive damages/loss of consortium.
- Jury allocated 70% fault to MGE and 30% to Graeme Abbott; awards: $1,150,000 compensatory, $375,000 punitive to Graeme, $25,000 loss of consortium to Katy.
- Circuit court reduced judgment after ThyssenKrupp settlement and entered judgment in MGE’s favor on punitive damages; Abbotts appealed and MGE cross-appealed.
- Appellate court reversed for a new trial due to instructional error (MAI deviation in Instruction No. 6) and remanded; settlement-related reduction and other issues not reached.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Instruction No. 6 properly stated the standard of care | Abbotts rely on Stephens/Fields to justify the higher standard. | MGE argues MAI controls and no deviation from MAI occurred. | Instruction No. 6 deviated from MAI and was prejudicial; need new trial. |
| Whether deviation from MAI mandates reversal when prejudicial | Deviation should not prejudice Abbotts given precedent. | Deviation creates prejudice; new trial warranted. | Prejudice presumed; reversal and new trial required. |
| Whether the court properly addressed post-trial reduction under §537.060 | Reduction aligned with ThyssenKrupp settlement should be reconsidered. | Judgment reduction appropriate under statute. | Question not reached on appeal because instructional error dispositively required remand. |
Key Cases Cited
- Syn, Inc. v. Beebe, 200 S.W.3d 122 (Mo.App.2006) (instructional error standard; de novo review; use of MAI)
- Fields v. Mo. Power & Light Co., 374 S.W.2d 17 (Mo.1963) (ordinary care standard for gas-related duties)
- Stephens v. Kansas City Gas Co., 191 S.W.2d 601 (Mo.1946) (gas company only required to use ordinary care; highest care rejected)
- Brown v. St. Louis Pub. Sen. Co., 421 S.W.2d 255 (Mo. Banc 1967) (mandatory use of MAI; deviation prejudicial unless perfect nonprejudice shown)