Dansbery v. N. States Power Co.

• Decision Date: 12 January 1926
• Citation: 188 Wis. 586,206 N.W. 882
• Parties: DANSBERY v. NORTHERN STATES POWER CO.
• Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

188 Wis. 586

206 N.W. 882

DANSBERY

v.NORTHERN STATES POWER CO.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

Jan. 12, 1926.

Appeal from Circuit Court, La Crosse County; R. S. Cowie, Judge.

Action by Walter Dansbery against the Northern States Power Company. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

The action is one brought to recover damages for personal injuries. The plaintiff was enployed by the La Crosse Steam Laundry Company, a corporation, as a stationary engineer and fireman, in its plant in the city of La Crosse, and both employee and employer were under the Workmen's Compensation Act (St. 1925, §§ 102.01 to 102.41). The laundry company was insured by the Wisconsin Mutual Liability Company, and, compensation having been paid, the common-law cause of action was duly assigned to the plaintiff, who thereafter commenced this action against the defendant.

The action was tried before a jury, and, by the special verdict submitted to it, it found: (1) That the plaintiff was injured by contact with a guy wire leading to the smokestack of the La Crosse Steam Laundry; (2) that such guy wire was charged with the electric current of the defendant company, due to the contact of the secondary service wire of the defendant company with another guy wire connected with such smokestack; (3) that the defendant was wanting in the exercise of ordinary care in permitting its secondary service wire to remain in contact with the guy wire of the smokestack of the La Crosse Steam Laundry Company at the time of the accident; (4) that such want of ordinary care on the part of the defendant was the proximate cause of plaintiff's injury; (5) that such condition existed for such a length of time that the defendant company and its officers and agents, in the exercise of ordinary care and prudence, ought to have known of and remedied the same before the plaintiff's injury; (6) that the defendant company had actual notice that there was a leak in its current, in the immediate vicinity of the accident, a sufficient time prior thereto to have enabled it, in the exercise of reasonable diligence, to have remedied the same; (7) that such leak was a proximate cause of plaintiff's injury; (8) that the plaintiff was not wanting in the exercise of ordinary care which contributed to his injury; and (9) that the plaintiff, by reason of the accident, sustained damages in the sum of $8,719.92.

On the rendition of the verdict, the usual motions were made by counsel, and judgment was thereupon ordered in plaintiff's favor for the sum of $8,000, together with costs and disbursements, and, judgment being entered accordingly, the defendant brings this appeal. Further facts will be stated in the opinion.

Lees & Bunge, of La Crosse, for appellant.

F. E. Withrow, of La Crosse, for respondent.

DOERFLER, J. (after stating the facts as above).

The defendant company maintained a service wire which extended from one of its transformers across the building of the laundry company and conveyed an electric current of 440 volts. The laundry company maintained a number of guy wires which were attached to the smokestack, on which was located an iron collar, and one of these guy wires extended over the service wire, was fastened to the collar, and, prior to the accident, had sagged so that it came in contact with the service wire. An examination of this service wire after the accident disclosed that the insulation at or about the point of contact with the guy wire was worn off. Attached to the smokestack and leading to the rear door of the laundry company was another guy wire, the ends of which were used by the laundry company in fastening said rear door. Extending from this smokestack there were also several guy wires, which were anchored in the walls of the building of the Creasey Corporation. It appears from the evidence that the electricity escaping from the service wire was transmitted to the guy wire with which it came in contact, was then transmitted to the iron collar on the smokestack, and from thence into the wires which were anchored in the building of the Creasey Corporation, and the wire which led to the door above mentioned, of the laundry company. After the accident, when the guy wire which had sagged was raised, no further trouble was experienced either at the laundry company's building or at that of the Creasey Corporation.

Some two weeks or more prior to the accident, a patron of the Creasey Corporation sustained an electric shock when opening a door of its building. One Rothermel, the manager of the Creasey Corporation, testified that several weeks prior to the accident the walls of the Creasey Corporation were charged with electricity, and that he telephoned to the service department of the defendant company notifying it of such fact, and that several days thereafter he again notified the defendant, directing his notice to the trouble department of the company, but that no attention was paid to these complaints. Here it must be mentioned that the employees of the defendant company being in charge of the trouble and service departments testified that they had no knowledge whatsoever of the company having received any such notice.

On the 9th day of March, 1922, at the hour of about 12 o'clock noon, the plaintiff, in attempting to fasten the door in the rear of the laundry company's building, used, as had been his custom theretofore, the end of the guy wire which led to the smokestack, and in so doing received a severe electric shock and burns known as second degree burns to the fingers of his right hand. It also appears that the plaintiff prior to the accident had no knowledge whatsoever of electric currents having been transmitted through any of these guy wires.

At the time of the trial the plaintiff was 44 years of age. Before the accident he was a strong, healthy, and able-bodied man, weighing about 170 to 175 pounds; that owing to the injuries and shock he became partially unconscious, and did not realize fully his surroundings until the following morning while he was at the hospital; that he was under a physician's care almost continuously for a month and a half; that he became very nervous and irritable, and had an aversion to people in general; that the injuries inflicted caused him severe pain; that he lost considerable sleep, and that his...