Power Line Electrocution in Oklahoma: Who Is Liable?

When someone in Oklahoma is shocked or electrocuted by a power line, who pays usually turns on three questions: whether the line's owner met the demanding duty Oklahoma places on electric companies, whether anyone broke the state's six-foot law, and who owned the line. The Oklahoma Supreme Court has affirmed a verdict where the jury was told an electric company owes the highest degree of care, and it has held that a utility's violation of the National Electrical Safety Code is negligence per se. It has also held that a utility whose lines meet the Corporation Commission's code requirements has made a prima facie showing that it was not negligent, unless it was aware of unusual circumstances that made an injury foreseeable. A separate 1963 statute bars work and equipment within six feet of high-voltage lines, and when a violation leads to contact with a line, the utility can seek reimbursement from whoever broke the rule. If the line belongs to a city or town, the Governmental Tort Claims Act adds a one-year notice requirement and damage caps. A high duty is not automatic liability, so the facts of how the contact happened matter from the first day.

How Power Line Contacts Happen

Oklahoma's reported cases show the range. In Rotramel, a man cleaning a building was electrocuted when his aluminum ladder touched a 13,200-volt line that ran about ten feet from the building. In Woodis, a 15-year-old climbed an unlighted transmission tower after midnight and was killed when electricity arced to him near the top. In Fort Worth Grain Exchange, a worker standing on a railcar was shocked when his metal grain probe touched a line. In Travelers Insurance Co. v. L.V. French Truck Service, a crew moving a drilling rig found the load would not clear a line, and an employee climbed onto the truck to raise it.

Each scenario raises different questions: how high the line was, whether it met the safety code, whether anyone called the utility first, who was operating the equipment, and whose land or job site it was. Because electrical contact can cause burns, amputations, and other permanent injuries, those questions also drive the damages analysis. Our articles on burn injury claims and amputation and limb loss claims cover those injuries in more depth.

The Standard Oklahoma Applies to Electric Companies

Oklahoma courts have long described electricity as extremely dangerous. In Rotramel v. Public Service Co., 1975 OK 91, 546 P.2d 1015, the trial court dismissed the family's wrongful death case, and the question on appeal was whether the petition failed because it did not specifically allege that the company violated the National Electrical Safety Code. The Oklahoma Supreme Court held it did not fail and reversed. It said a company that transports and sells electricity owes a greater degree of care than owners of less dangerous property, and it held that compliance with the code is not conclusive proof of due care but "only one factor to be considered." The company can raise its compliance as a defense at trial.

Ten years later, Woodis v. Oklahoma Gas & Electric Co., 1985 OK 62, 704 P.2d 483, went further. The court found substantial evidence that the tower the teenager climbed violated the safety code because the lowest rung of its ladder was less than 6½ feet from the ground. The Supreme Court held that a violation of the code is negligence per se and that, where a utility has violated a safety regulation of that kind, the traditional rules limiting what a landowner owes a trespasser do not apply; the question becomes proximate cause. The jury had been instructed on the "highest degree of care" owed by electric companies, and the court affirmed the parents' judgment. The jury assigned 65 percent of the negligence to the utility and 35 percent to the boy. Two justices dissented in whole or in part: one would have reversed for a new trial on the trespasser instruction, and the other argued that ordinary care, not the highest degree of care, was the right standard.

Two cautions belong here. First, a demanding duty still requires proof. The injured person must show the company fell short and that its failure caused the injury, and the injured person's own share of fault is compared under Oklahoma's comparative negligence rules. Second, code compliance carries real weight. In Shelley v. Kiwash Electric Cooperative, 1996 OK 44, 914 P.2d 669, a raised grain auger touched a cooperative's lines, killing a minor who was helping and burning two ranch hands. Relying on Trett v. Oklahoma Gas & Electric Co., 1989 OK 54, 775 P.2d 275, the Oklahoma Supreme Court repeated that, absent unusual conditions, maintaining lines to the Corporation Commission's and the code's requirements is a prima facie showing that the utility was not negligent, and that the injured person must then prove exceptional circumstances. Actual notice is not always required, but the utility must have been aware of circumstances that made the injury foreseeable. The court affirmed summary judgment for the cooperative; in Trett, it had reversed a worker's verdict and directed judgment for the utility. The Commission's current rule for the utilities it regulates, OAC 165:35-25-3, last amended effective October 1, 2024, requires installation and maintenance that meets the code's minimum requirements and routine inspection of overhead lines, and it states that facilities meeting the code's minimum clearances are deemed to meet the code's purpose of the practical safeguarding of persons. Under that framework, the key questions are often whether the line actually met the code and what the utility knew about how the area around it was being used.

Oklahoma's Six-Foot Law

A separate statute, enacted in 1963 and codified at 63 O.S. §§ 981–987, regulates people and businesses whose work brings them near overhead lines:

• The six-foot rule. Section 981 prohibits performing, or permitting an employee to perform, any work where a person, or any tool, equipment, machinery, or material, could come within six feet of a high-voltage overhead line through any lateral, vertical, or swinging motion. Section 982 separately bars storing, operating, moving, or transporting equipment, materials, or buildings within six feet of a line.
• What counts as high voltage. Section 985 defines high voltage as more than 750 volts and covers overhead conductors whether bare or insulated, except lines that are de-energized and grounded or enclosed in iron pipe or other metal covering of equal strength. An insulated line is still covered.
• Warning signs on equipment. Section 983 requires cranes, derricks, power shovels, drilling rigs, hoisting equipment, and similar machines to carry a durable sign, legible at twelve feet, reading "Unlawful to operate this equipment within six feet of high voltage lines."
• The way to work closer. Section 986 requires the person responsible for the work to promptly notify the line operator and arrange temporary barriers, de-energizing and grounding, or raising the line before doing work that would impair the six-foot clearance. The statute does not set a fixed number of hours or days of notice. The party requesting the clearance pays the operator's actual cost, and the operator has no duty to provide it until payment arrangements are made.
• Exemptions. Section 987 excludes authorized work on the power lines themselves, work on telephone or communication circuits, and operation of railroad equipment on fixed rails.
• Penalties. Section 984 makes a violation a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of up to $500, up to six months in county jail, or both.

Federal workplace rules are often stricter. In general industry, under 29 C.F.R. § 1910.333(c)(3), unqualified workers in elevated positions may not come closer than 10 feet to an unguarded, energized overhead line of 50,000 volts or less, and vehicles and mechanical equipment must keep a 10-foot clearance, with greater distances for higher voltages and limited exceptions. Construction has its own rules: for cranes and similar equipment near lines up to 350,000 volts, 29 C.F.R. § 1926.1408 requires the employer to have the line de-energized and grounded, keep a 20-foot clearance, or determine the line's voltage and keep the minimum distance in the rule's table, which is 10 feet for lines up to 50,000 volts.

When a Violation Shifts the Bill

Section 984 does more than set a criminal penalty. If a violation results in contact with a line, the violator is liable to the line's owner or operator for damage to the facilities "and for all liability incurred by such owner or operator as a result of any such accidental contact." In practice, that means a utility that pays an injured worker can turn around and seek reimbursement from the employer or contractor who broke the six-foot rule. The claim is not automatic: the employer can raise the utility's own contributory negligence and assumption of the risk, and those defenses go to a jury.

The Oklahoma Supreme Court has applied that provision against employers. In Travelers Insurance Co. v. L.V. French Truck Service, Inc., 1988 OK 76, 770 P.2d 551, the employee who climbed onto the drilling-rig load received workers' compensation and then obtained an agreed judgment against the electric cooperative that owned the line. The cooperative's insurer sued the employer under § 984. The court held that the employer's immunity under the workers' compensation statute then in effect did not extend to § 984 liability, and that the three-year limitations period for the indemnity claim ran from payment of the loss. It reversed the summary judgment for the insurer because fact issues remained. In Public Service Co. of Oklahoma v. Fort Worth Grain Exchange, 1998 OK 89, 988 P.2d 323, the utility paid the injured grain worker $610,000 and sued his employer. The court held that the railroad-equipment exemption did not apply because the worker was sampling grain, not operating railroad equipment, and it reversed the utility's summary judgment because the employer was entitled to have a jury decide contributory negligence and assumption of the risk.

Both decisions arose under Oklahoma's former workers' compensation statutes. The current Administrative Workers' Compensation Act took effect in 2014. Its exclusive-remedy section, 85A O.S. § 5(A), makes the Act's remedies exclusive of other rights of the employee and of anyone else "claiming rights to recovery on behalf of the employee"; it does not mention a utility's own claim under § 984, and we have not found an appellate decision applying § 984 indemnity under the current Act. For an injured person, the practical point is that the six-foot question rarely stays in the background. The utility will look closely at who placed the equipment, whether anyone called the operator, and what the employer knew, and those facts can shape how the injury claim is defended.

Hurt on the Job: Workers' Compensation and Third-Party Claims

When an electrical injury happens at work, workers' compensation is generally the exclusive remedy against the employer, with narrow exceptions explained in our article on workers' comp exclusivity. That does not end the matter. Under 85A O.S. § 43, filing a compensation claim does not affect the employee's right to sue a third party for the injury, such as a utility whose line was too low or poorly maintained. If there is a third-party recovery, reasonable fees and costs of collection come off the top, the employer or carrier receives two-thirds of the remainder or the amount of its lien, whichever is less, and the rest goes to the injured worker or the worker's dependents.

City-Owned Lines and the Governmental Tort Claims Act

Not every line belongs to a private company. Under the Governmental Tort Claims Act's definitions in 51 O.S. § 152, a municipality includes any incorporated city or town and its institutions, agencies, and instrumentalities, and a political subdivision includes a public trust whose sole beneficiary is a city, town, school district, or county. If a line belongs to one of those entities, written notice of the claim generally must be presented within one year of the loss, and recoverable damages are capped. Our guide to GTCA notice deadlines and damage caps explains the current limits and the shorter deadlines that follow a denial. Finding out early who owns the line, from the pole, the utility's records, or the account for the property, keeps that one-year clock from running out unnoticed.

Damages After an Electrical Injury

Economic losses, including medical care, lost earnings, and future care, are not capped in an ordinary injury case against a private defendant. Oklahoma's 2025 law, 23 O.S. § 61.3, generally caps noneconomic damages such as pain and suffering at $500,000, but it removes the cap for permanent and severe physical injuries such as substantial disfigurement, loss of use of a limb, or loss or substantial impairment of a major body organ or system, and for injuries caused by gross negligence or intentional conduct. Wrongful death actions are excluded from the cap. Serious electrical injuries can fall within those exceptions, which makes medical documentation of permanence important. Our article on Oklahoma's $500,000 noneconomic cap walks through the details and effective date, and our guide to wrongful death claims covers fatal cases.

What to Do After a Power Line Injury

1. Stay safe first. Treat any downed or sagging line as live. Stay away from it and from anyone or anything still touching it, and call 911 and the utility. If you are in a vehicle or machine that is touching a line, OSHA's guidance is to stay inside and call for help unless it is on fire; if you must get out, jump clear without touching the vehicle and the ground at the same time, land with both feet together, and shuffle away in small steps.
2. Get medical care and keep records. Tell providers the injury came from electrical contact, follow up, and keep every record and bill.
3. Photograph the scene from a safe distance. Capture the line, the pole and any numbers or owner markings on it, the equipment or ladder involved, the weather, and the surroundings.
4. Identify who owned the line and who controlled the work. The answers decide whether the GTCA applies, whether workers' compensation is involved, and whether the six-foot law is in play.
5. Preserve the equipment. Ask that the ladder, crane, probe, or other equipment not be repaired, altered, or discarded, and send preservation letters to the utility, the employer, and the equipment owner. Our article on spoliation of evidence explains why.
6. Ask about an OSHA file. Under 29 C.F.R. § 1904.39, an employer covered by federal OSHA must report a work-related death to OSHA within eight hours and an in-patient hospitalization, amputation, or loss of an eye within 24 hours, so a workplace electrocution may have generated a federal report and investigation records.
7. Be careful with insurer interviews. The utility's adjuster may ask for a recorded statement early. Our article on recorded statement traps explains what to consider first.
8. Calendar the deadlines. Most negligence claims must be filed within two years, and a claim involving a city-owned line requires notice within one year. See our overview of Oklahoma statutes of limitations.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is the power company automatically responsible if someone is electrocuted?

No. Oklahoma holds electric companies to a demanding standard, but the injured person still has to prove the company was negligent and that its negligence caused the injury. A violation of the National Electrical Safety Code can establish negligence. But proof that the company's lines met the code and the Corporation Commission's requirements is a prima facie showing that it was not negligent, and the injured person then generally must show unusual circumstances, known to the company, that made the injury foreseeable. Any fault of the injured person is compared under Oklahoma's comparative negligence rules.

What if the person who was hurt was trespassing or got too close to the line?

That does not automatically end the claim. In Woodis v. Oklahoma Gas & Electric Co., a teenager climbed a transmission tower at night, and the Oklahoma Supreme Court held that the utility's safety-code violation took the case outside the usual trespasser rule. The jury assigned 35 percent of the negligence to him and 65 percent to the utility. A person's own conduct, including a violation of the six-foot law, can still reduce or bar a recovery under comparative negligence, but the six-foot law does not give the utility immunity, so a violation does not automatically end the claim.

Can I sue if I was shocked or electrocuted at work?

Usually not your employer, because workers' compensation is generally the exclusive remedy against the employer. But Oklahoma law preserves claims against third parties, such as a utility whose line was too low or poorly maintained, and the compensation carrier generally has a lien on part of that recovery. If your employer broke the six-foot law, the utility may later seek reimbursement from the employer under 63 O.S. § 984.

How long do I have to file a power line injury claim in Oklahoma?

Most negligence claims must be filed within two years under 12 O.S. § 95(A)(3). If the line belongs to a city, town, or other political subdivision, written notice of the claim generally must be presented within one year under the Governmental Tort Claims Act, and the deadlines to sue after a denial are shorter. Claims involving a death or a minor can follow different rules, so check the timeline early.

This article is general information, not legal advice, and does not create an attorney-client relationship.