American Heating & Plumbing Co. v. Grimes
| Decision Date | 08 December 1941 |
| Docket Number | 34728. |
| Citation | 192 Miss. 125,4 So.2d 890 |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
| Parties | AMERICAN HEATING & PLUMBING CO. v. GRIMES et al. |
Hugh F. Causey, of Cleveland, for appellant.
Watkins & Eager, of Jackson, and U. B. Parker, of Wiggins, for appellees.
Appellant was the contractor for the installation of the equipment constituting the gas heating system in a new auditorium building for the Leland Consolidated School District. Among the units installed was a large Pittsburg heater located within the curtain wall on the side of the stage. This heater was a heavy cast-iron instrumentality finished with aluminum bronze, and its dimensions were approximately 3 1/3 feet high, 28 inches wide and 31 inches deep. The proof is to the effect that in installing such a heater within a wall, the heater must be insulated from the wall by noncombustible material between the heater and any combustible material in the wall or else there shall be no combustible material in the wall nearer the heater than say six inches at least, and if one or the other of these precautions is not taken fire will probably be communicated from the heater to the wall.
The contract for the construction of the building was held by another concern which we will call the construction company. When the construction company had proceeded with its work to the extent that the outside walls had been erected, the roof put on, the first or rough flooring laid, and the studding had been placed in the curtain walls, appellant sent its foreman to install the gas pipes and also the heaters in the curtain walls. Appellant's employee found that the upright studs in the curtain walls then fastened in place were of pine wood each 2 X 6 and were 16 inches apart. In the wall where the heater was placed which caused the fire for which this suit was brought, appellant's employee removed one of the studs, leaving thereby at that point a space between the studs of approximately 32 inches; and in this space appellant swung the heater suspending it by pipes or rods fastened from above, with the result that the sides of the heater were each within about 2 inches of the wooden studs.
When this had been done, the construction company proceeded to the completion of the curtain walls which was done by plaster laid on wooden laths. In this process the wooden laths were brought even nearer to the heater than the two inches last above mentioned. No noncombustible insulation between the heater and the combustible material in the wall was installed either by appellant or any other person. The result, as should have been well known and anticipated by appellant, was that when the heaters were put into operation and on the first occasion when they had operated for any considerable period of time fire from the particular heater mentioned was communicated to the combustible material in the curtain...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Johnson v. William C. Ellis & Sons Iron Works, Inc.
...189 So.2d 113, Cert. denied sub nom. Yates v. Hodges, 1967, 386 U.S. 912, 87 S.Ct. 860, 17 L.Ed.2d 784; American Heating & Plumbing Co. v. Grimes, 1941, 192 Miss. 125, 4 So.2d 890; and Mississippi Power & Light Co. v. McCormick, 1936, 175 Miss. 337, 166 So. 534. None of these decisions conc......
-
Dow v. Holly Mfg. Co.
...the safety and security of life and property it has its foundation in the essence of the social compact.' American Heating & Plumbing Co. v. Grimes, 192 Miss. 125, 4 So.2d 890, 891; see, Gobrecht v. Beckwith, 82 N.H. 415, 135 A. 20, 52 A.L.R. 858. Gas heaters have the inherent capacity for ......
-
Hadad v. Booth
...him to install the heater. If the jury finds that Booth had that obligation, then the rule laid down in American Heating & Plumbing Co. v. Grimes, 1941, 192 Miss. 125, 4 So.2d 890, 891, is pertinent. In that case appellant was the contractor for installation of a gas heating system in a sch......
-
Trustees of the First Baptist Church of Corinth v. McElroy
...the fact that he followed the plans and specifications of an architect. Appellant relies on three cases: American Heating & Plumbing Co. v. Grimes, 192 Miss. 125, 4 So.2d 890; Mississippi Power & Light Co. v. Thomas, 206 Miss. 201, 39 So.2d 759, 40 So.2d 597; Mississippi Public Service Co. ......