## Facts

- Iowa City owned and operated an underground water-main system.
- A city water main broke, water escaped, and the Lubins’ store basement flooded, damaging merchandise.
- The Lubins sued on three theories: (1) strict liability for escape of water, (2) res ipsa loquitur negligence, and (3) specific negligence for failing to shut off the water promptly.
- The trial court refused to submit the strict-liability count to the jury and submitted only res ipsa loquitur and specific negligence.
- The jury returned a defense verdict for the city on the submitted counts.
- The trial court granted the Lubins a new trial, finding the verdict failed to achieve substantial justice and indicating the strict-liability theory should have been considered.

## Issues

1. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by granting a new trial on the ground that the defense verdict failed to do substantial justice.
2. Whether a municipality operating underground water mains may be held strictly liable for property damage caused by escape of water from a main break under the circumstances presented.

## Decision

- The Iowa Supreme Court affirmed the order granting a new trial.
- The court held the trial court acted within its discretion in concluding the verdict did not accomplish substantial justice.
- The court recognized that strict liability could apply to the city’s operation of underground water mains where they are intentionally left uninspected and unmaintained until they break, and that the strict-liability theory should be submitted on retrial.

## Legal Principles

- A trial court has broad (though not unlimited) discretion to grant a new trial when it determines a verdict fails to accomplish substantial justice; appellate review is deferential, particularly when a new trial is granted.
- When a city acts in a proprietary capacity operating a water system, it may be treated like a private actor for tort-liability purposes.
- Strict liability may be imposed for escape of water from an underground municipal main when the operator deliberately leaves the mains underground without inspection or maintenance until failure, making breaks expected and resulting damage to neighboring property foreseeable.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed a new-trial order and approved submission of a strict-liability claim against a city for flood damage caused by a water-main break, reasoning that a municipality operating a water system as a proprietary enterprise may bear strict liability when it intentionally leaves underground mains uninspected until inevitable failure.


Lubin v. Iowa City, 257 Iowa 383, 131 N.W.2d 765 (Iowa 1964)