Summary of a Recent
Judicial Development in
Agriculture and Urbanization

Stray Voltage Lawsuit Not Barred by Statute
of Limitations

Ross H. Pifer
National AgLaw Center Graduate Assistant

In Allen v. Wisconsin Public Service Corp., 694 N.W.2d 420 (Wisc. Ct. App. 2005), dairy farmer Russell Allen filed suit against an electric utility company alleging that his farming operation had been negligently damaged by stray voltage. Allen began to experience problems with low milk production in 1976, and by 1988, he suspected stray voltage as the problem. See id. at 423. At that time, the electric company performed an investigation and concluded that there was no stray voltage on Allen's farm. See id. Subsequently, Allen unsuccessfully attempted to improve his milk production by working with dairy nutritionists, purchasing a new mixer feed wagon, and installing a new milking parlor. See id. at 425. In 1997, an electrician hired by Allen confirmed that there was stray voltage caused by the electric company on the farm. See id. at 423. Allen then filed suit against the electric company on November 9, 2000. See id. The electric company argued that Allen's lawsuit was barred by the statute of limitations because he "began experiencing the problems more than six years before he filed suit." Id. at 424. The Court of Appeals of Wisconsin, however, stated that "Allen did not know nor could he have known through reasonable diligence that [the electric company] was the cause of his herd's problems until [1997]." Id. at 425. The court concluded that "the record establishe[d] that Allen exercised reasonable diligence to investigate the source of his herd's problems." Id. at 426. Accordingly, the court held that Allen's lawsuit fell within the six-year limitations period. See id.

The case was decided on February 15, 2005; this summary was posted June 10, 2005.