Volume 101 — Washington Reports, Second Series

<bold>[1] Trial — Taking Case From Jury — Sufficiency of Evidence —</bold> <bold>Substantial Evidence.</bold> A judgment n.o.v. or directed verdict is proper when, viewing the evidence and reasonable inferences therefrom most favorably to the nonmoving party, there is no substantial evidence supporting a verdict under applicable law. Substantial evidence is evidence sufficient to convince an unprejudiced, thinking mind of the truth of the assertion. <bold>[2] Admiralty — Duty of Shipowner — Employees of Third Party —</bold> <bold>Scope — Question of Law or Fact.</bold> An owner of a vessel does not have the duties of an employer regarding the activities of employees of a third party working aboard the vessel if the owner has turned the right to control the methods and operative detail of the work over to the third party. Whether the owner has done so is generally a question of law. <bold>[3] Admiralty — Duty of Shipowner — Employees of Third Party —</bold> <bold>Beginning Work.</bold> A vessel owner's duty to an independent contractor whose employees are to work aboard the vessel is limited to eliminating or warning of hidden dangerous conditions existing in areas of the vessel where the employees could reasonably be expected to go. <bold>[4] Admiralty — Duty of Shipowner — Employees of Third Party —</bold> <bold>Transfer of Control — Effect.</bold> A vessel owner who has relinquished control over the details of work performed aboard the vessel by employees of an independent contractor has no duty to intervene to alleviate a dangerous condition aboard the vessel unless he has actual knowledge of the condition and the contractor's continuing operations despite the condition and he should realize that the condition presents an unreasonable risk of harm to the contractor's employees. STAFFORD, J., did not participate in the disposition of this case.

<bold>[1] Statutes — Construction — Unambiguous Language.</bold> A statute is not subject to judicial construction if the ordinary meaning of its language is certain and unambiguous. <bold>[2] Utility Services — Ratemaking — Construction Work in</bold> <bold>Progress — Inclusion in Rate Base.</bold> Under RCW <cross_reference>80.04.250</cross_reference>, which permits the value of a utility's property "used and useful for service in this state" to be included in the utility's rate base for ratemaking purposes, construction work in progress is not "used and useful for service" and its value may not be included in the utility's rate base. <bold>[3] Statutes — Construction — Amendment — Effect on Prior Law.</bold> The Legislature's passage of an amendment to an unambiguous statute indicates an intent to change the preexisting law. STAFFORD and DOLLIVER, JJ., did not participate in the disposition of this case.