This article was posted 12/10/2007 and is most likely outdated.

Supreme Court Upholds Award for Marathon County Dairy Farmers
 

 

Topic - Stray Voltage
Subject - Supreme Court Upholds Award for Marathon County Dairy Farmers

December 10, 2007
This newsletter was sent to 27673 newsletter subscribers

Ask a Question |  Weekly Code GraphicQuizzes |  Free Stuff InstructorsOnline Training Products | Seminars | SubscribeUnsubscribe
[ image1 Post Comments | View Comments | Notify Me When Comments Are Added ] Web Page Version [Printer-Friendly]    

Supreme Court Upholds Award for Marathon County Dairy Farmers

MADISON— The Wisconsin Supreme Court has upheld a nearly $533,000 award to Marathon County dairy farmers who claim a power company’s stray voltage hurt their cows’ milk production.

In a 4-to-3 split decision Thursday, the court rejected arguments made by Northern States Power Company that the lower court’s decision be overturned.

The company has argued that some of the verdict questions a judge submitted to the jury were in error. But the state’s high court says no errors were made.

In the Marathon County case, James and Michael Gumz of rural Athens said they began noticing physical and behavioral problems in their herd in 1991, 10 years after they bought their parents’ dairy farm. The problems included cow deaths and poor milk production.

The problems persisted, and in 1996 they asked Northern States Power to conduct tests for stray voltage.

Stray voltage is electricity that leaks from a utility’s electrical distribution system or farm wiring. Some utility companies argue stray voltage isn’t a problem, while some farmers claim it hurts cows’ health.

The power company said its tests showed the “cow contact voltage” was below the “level of concern.” However, an independent electrical tester hired by the farmers determined that stray voltage from the power company’s distribution system was coming onto the farm.

The Gumzes sued in 2001 and were awarded $332,336 by a Marathon County jury for lost milk production and lost market value of their cows and $200,000 for “annoyance” and loss of use and enjoyment of their property.

An appeals court upheld the ruling, which the Supreme Court affirmed Thursday. The high court said the Gumzes’ action was not barred under the state’s six-year statute of limitations because they showed reasonable diligence in investigating the cause of damage to their herd.

The court also ruled in favor of Clark County dairy farmers in a stray voltage case, sending it back to a lower court for a ruling.

Wausau Daily Herald

 

 

 

Click here to post a comment
[ View More Newsletters ] [ Send to a Friend ] [ Post Comments | View Comments | Notify Me When Comments Are Added ]

Copyright © Mike Holt Enterprises, Inc. All rights reserved.
This article is protected by United States copyright and other intellectual property laws and may not be
displayed or published on the internet without the prior written permission of Mike Holt Enterprises, Inc.

http://www.MikeHolt.com     1-888-NEC-CODE (1-888-632-2633)

Experiencing a Problem? Click Here

 
Comments
  • I do have concern for a "precedent" being set, because every situation is different. The series of events involved in this case may not be typical of others, but the same "precedent" may be applied. I believe that an objective third party needs to exist that has the knowledge and experience to help with these situations. Our local farmers, as well as ourselves (electric co-operative), have had the benefit of such a person. He works for the ag extension office of a university. He has the knowledge and experience to help solve these problems. He has pointed the finger at us (many times)as well as the farmer, the difference is he is able to bring resolution to where the problem exists. His objective is to resolve the problem, not line his pockets. Too many people find it easy to blame the utility just as well as too many utilities blame the farmer. If any 'precedent' needs to be set, this is it.

    Bob Joslin
  • Reply from: Wyatt   
    Don't forget.....the utility companies are exempt from the NEC ! They must have a good lobbyist..........maybe Jack Abramoff ?


Reply to this comment
* Your Name:
   Your name will appear under your comments.

* Your Email:
   Your email address is not displayed.
* Comments:

This newsletter is closed to new comments.

Email Notification Options:
Notify me when a reply is posted to this comment
Notify me whenever a comment is posted to this newsletter