Section 12.17 Proof of Lack of Dangerousness or Defect

• Library: Evidence 2017

a. (§12.17) Proof of Lack of Dangerousness or Defect

The first exception to the general rule that absence of a similar happening is not admissible to disprove negligence is that absence of a similar happening may be admitted as proof that a property condition was not dangerous. Included below are examples of cases in which the court allowed evidence of the absence of a similar happening to be admitted to prove lack of dangerousness or defect:

· Siebern v. Mo.-Ill. Tractor & Equip. Co., 711 S.W.2d 935, 940–41 (Mo. App. E.D. 1986). In a wrongful death action for a fatal accident caused by the rollover of heavy equipment, involving an issue as to the existence of dangerousness, testimony that equipment of that model had never been involved in any other rollovers was held to be admissible when it was deemed not to raise a collateral issue and not confusing to the jury.

· Riney v. Zenith Radio Corp., 668 S.W.2d 610, 611 (Mo. App. E.D. 1984). The court allowed expert testimony from a Zenith employee that no fires from a defect of this model had been reported.

· Hawkins v. Scott’s Gas of Lowry City, Inc...