Connection lost
Server error
LEVI v. S.W. LA. ELEC. MEMBERSHIP CO-OP. Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: A power company was found negligent for maintaining an uninsulated high-voltage line dangerously close to an oil well’s access road. The court held that the severe risk of electrocution to workers using tall equipment far outweighed the minimal cost of taking safety precautions.
Legal Significance: This case provides a quintessential judicial application of the Hand formula (B < P x L) for determining negligence, holding that a risk is unreasonable when the burden of precaution is less than the probability of injury multiplied by the gravity of the potential harm.
LEVI v. S.W. LA. ELEC. MEMBERSHIP CO-OP. Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
The plaintiff, an oil field worker, was severely injured when the mast of his work truck contacted the defendant power company’s (Slemco) uninsulated 14,400-volt power line. The accident occurred at the E.C. Stuart #2 Well. Unlike the other 21 wells in the field, where Slemco had intentionally routed its power lines to provide a wide berth and avoid access roads, the line at the Stuart #2 well crossed the only access road just 40.5 feet from the wellhead and at a height of only 25.7 feet. This deviation was due to an oversight in Slemco’s original construction plan. Slemco knew that oil field workers regularly used trucks with masts that could extend to a height of 34 feet. On the day of the accident, the plaintiff parked on the well site’s access road to make repairs to his equipment. Although he had previously noticed the power line, he was inattentive on this occasion and raised the mast into or near the line, causing a massive electrical discharge. The jury found Slemco was not negligent, and the court of appeal affirmed.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Did the power company breach its duty of care by maintaining an uninsulated high-voltage power line in close proximity to an oil well access road where it knew workers operated tall equipment, thereby creating an unreasonable risk of harm?
Yes. The power company was negligent as a matter of law. The Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non pr
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Did the power company breach its duty of care by maintaining an uninsulated high-voltage power line in close proximity to an oil well access road where it knew workers operated tall equipment, thereby creating an unreasonable risk of harm?
Conclusion
This case is a leading example of the application of the risk-utility Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip
Legal Rule
A defendant's conduct is negligent when it creates an unreasonable risk of Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit e
Legal Analysis
The Supreme Court of Louisiana applied a risk-utility balancing test, explicitly referencing Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea com
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- A power company was held negligent for placing an uninsulated high-voltage