Greenwald v. Northern States Power Co.
| Decision Date | 07 May 1948 |
| Docket Number | No. 34620.,34620. |
| Citation | 32 N.W.2d 320,226 Minn. 216 |
| Parties | GREENWALD v. NORTHERN STATES POWER CO. |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
Appeal from District Court, Scott County; Jos. J. Moriarty, Judge.
Action by E. Lydia Greenwald, special administratrix of the estate of Frederick William Greenwald, decedent, against Northern States Power Company to recover for the deceased's death as result of electric shock from defendant's high-voltage wire. From a judgment for plaintiff after denial of defendant's motion for judgment notwithstanding verdict, defendant appeals.
Judgment reversed with directions to order judgment for defendant notwithstanding verdict.
Charles H. Weyl, of St. Paul, for appellant.
Moonan, Sturner & Heinen, of New Prague, for respondent.
Plaintiff had a verdict in a wrongful-death case. Defendant appeals from the judgment after denial of its motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
The questions for decision are: (1) Whether an electric power company is liable for the death of a customer in a rural area caused by his unfastening a guy wire used to support a pole on his land which carried electric wires servicing his farm, and by his permitting it, while he was holding it, to come in contact with the electric wires; and (2) whether, if the preceding question is answered in the affirmative, the customer was guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law.
On July 27, 1946, decedent was killed by shock caused by electric current transmitted from a high-voltage wire, referred to in the testimony as the "primary" and the "hot" wire, through his body by means of a guy wire which he was holding and which after he had unfastened it came in contact with the hot wire. Decedent and his family lived on a farm which was serviced with electricity by defendant.
In 1940, defendant installed wires carrying 6,900 voltage from its power lines along the public highway to a pole on decedent's land a considerable distance therefrom on which there was a transformer. At the transformer connection was made with wires carrying much less voltage running to decedent's farmhouse and farm buildings. The wires extended east from the power line to the pole with the transformer and north from the pole to the farmhouse and other buildings. The fact that the pole supported wires on the west and north side made it necessary to install two guy wires, one to the east and the other to the south, to support the pole against the strains and stresses created thereby.
The hot wire was connected to the pole at about 6 inches from the top and about 24½ feet from the ground. About 30 inches below the hot wire was a static or neutral wire, and about 5 to 5½ feet below it was the transformer. A wire called the "primary jumper" extended from the hot wire to the transformer. Except for the primary jumper, all current was carried at a height of 24½ feet above the ground. Where the primary jumper was connected to the transformer the height was 19 or 19½ feet. There was also a ground wire covered by a wooden molding on the side of the pole extending from the neutral wire to the ground, the purpose of which was to make it safe for defendant's employes to work among the wires at the top of the pole. The guy wires were rather heavy cables having 7 heavy wire strands. The south guy wire was attached to the side of the pole about 2 to 2½ feet from the top and was connected with an anchor in the ground. The east guy wire was attached 1 to 1½ feet from the top of the pole. Connection with the anchor was made by pulling the end of the guy wire through an eye on the end of the anchor and turning the end back against and fastening it to the guy wire a short distance above the eye. This was done by unraveling the wire strands, cutting off 6 of them, and securing the end of the guy wire to the guy wire itself by means of the seventh strand, which was wound around both, and of a clamp held securely by means of three bolts and nuts. A special device was used to stretch the cable and make it taut. The connection so made held the guy wires rigid and made it impossible to disconnect them except by the use of a tool such as a wrench, pliers, or the like. There were no insulators on the guy wires, although they could have been installed at a nominal expense not exceeding a few dollars. If insulators had been installed, decedent would not have received the shock that caused his death.
The construction and maintenance of the wires here were according to the common practice in such situations and were such that no possible harm could come to anyone on the ground as a consequence of touching, bumping, taking hold of, or otherwise coming in contact with the guy wires. The only possible way a person could be injured would have been by disturbing the installation, and this could be done only by deliberately disconnecting the wires by use of a tool, which the evidence here shows was done by decedent with pliers without defendant's knowledge or consent. In the interval between 1940, when the wires were installed, and 1946, when the accident occurred, there was no mishap of any sort, and there was no reason for believing that one was likely to occur.
The evidence showed that in urban areas insulators were used on guy wires, but not in rural regions, as here. The reason given for the use of insulators in urban areas was to protect from harm workmen employed by others in proximity to the wires if they came in contact with them. For a man on the ground (and that included decedent and others in rural areas) there was no need for such protection and consequently none was afforded. During the 1940-1945 interval, decedent placed threshing machinery on adjacent land of his neighbor. In 1946 he could not do so, because his neighbor had his land in crop. He decided to use some land near the farm buildings for the purpose. Deeming the south guy wire a hindrance to his purpose, decedent determined to remove it. In doing so, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial