AMI 708 Inherently Dangerous Work—Imputed Conduct—Independent Contractor
Ark. Model Jury Instr., Civil AMI 708
Arkansas Model Jury Instructions-Civil
December 2023 Update
Chapter 7. Agency—Employment—Partnership—Joint Enterprise—Imputed Liability
AMI 708 Inherently Dangerous Work—Imputed Conduct—Independent Contractor
When I use the expression “inherently dangerous,” I mean [work to be performed][or][an instrumentality to be used] that can be safely [carried on][or][used] only by the exercise of special skill and care and which involves a grave risk of serious harm when it is unskillfully or carelessly [done][or][used].
[Ordinarily an employer is not chargeable with the negligence (fault) of an independent contractor; however, when the (work to be performed)(or)(instrumentality to be used) is inherently dangerous, any negligent conduct of an independent contractor is chargeable to his/her employer.]
NOTE ON USE
Do not use the second paragraph of this instruction when the case is submitted on interrogatories.
The second paragraph of this instruction is not applicable when the injured party is an employee of the independent contractor. Jackson v. Petit Jean Elec. Coop., 270 Ark. 506, 606 S.W.2d 66 (1980).
COMMENT
This instruction is a correct statement of the law. McCorkle Farms, Inc. v. Thompson, 79 Ark. App. 150, 84 S.W.3d 884 (2002).
The following activities have been found to be inherently dangerous: Copeland v. Hollingsworth, 259 Ark. 603, 535 S.W.2d 815 (1976) (spraying of 2-4-5-T herbicide); Hammond Ranch Corp. v. Dodson, 199 Ark. 846, 136 S.W.2d 484 (1940) (aerial application of arsenic poison); and McCorkle Farms, Inc., supra (aerial application of 2-4-D). The mere flying of a crop dusting airplane, however, has been found not to be inherently dangerous. Little v. McGraw, 250 Ark. 766, 467 S.W.2d 163 (1971) (plaintiff’s decedent killed when struck by a low flying cropduster).
© 2023 Arkansas Supreme Court Committee on Jury Instructions-Civil
| End of Document |