Hates v. Torrington Water Co.

• Court: Connecticut Supreme Court
• Writing for the Court: BEACH, J.
• Citation: Hates v. Torrington Water Co., 92 A. 406, 88 Conn. 609 (Conn. 1914)
• Decision Date: 02 December 1914
• Parties: HATES v. TORRINGTON WATER CO.

92 A. 406

88 Conn. 609

HATES

v. TORRINGTON WATER CO.

Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut.

Dec. 2, 1914.

Appeal from Superior Court, Litchfield County; William S. Case, Judge.

Action by Mary A. Hayes against the Torrington Water Company, to recover damages caused by defendant's negligence in supplying water infected with typhoid germs. From a judgment of nonsuit, plaintiff appeals. Reversed, and new trial ordered.

Caleb A. Morse, of New Haven, and Thomas J. Wall, of Torrington, for appellant.

William F. Henney, of Hartford, Donald T. Warner, of Salisbury, and Gideon H. Welch, of Torrington, for appellee.

BEACH, J. The complaint alleges that the defendant supplies the town of Torrington with water for domestic purposes, under a charter which gives it power to protect its water supply from pollution, and that the plaintiff, who lived in a house supplied with water through defendant's pipes, contracted typhoid fever from drinking the same. The negligence alleged is in not taking steps to protect the water supply from pollution, and in failing to adopt any measures lor purifying the water before turning it into the pipes for distribution, and in not ascertaining the unwholesome condition of the water, and in not notifying the plaintiff that it was unwholesome.

There was sufficient evidence that an epidemic of typhoid broke out in the town of Torrington in the fall of 1911; that the plaintiff contracted typhoid fever during its continuance; that the defendant obtained its water from two different watersheds, described as the Crystal Lake System and the Hart Brook System, respectively; that both of these sources were drawn upon during and before the epidemic; that the district supplied from the Crystal Lake System could be and was identified with reasonable certainty; that about 97 per cent. of the cases of typhoid during the epidemic either lived in the district supplied from the Crystal Lake System or furnished a definite history of having used Crystal Lake water; that typhoid fever can only be communicated by taking the germs into the system, usually in food or drink; that the Crystal Lake water was the only source of possible infection which was used in common by practically all those infected; and that laboratory examinations of the Crystal Lake water, made while the epidemic was in progress, disclosed a persistent appearance of colon bacilli, indicating the possibility that the water was infected with typhoid germs also.

From these facts we cannot say that the jury might not reasonably have inferred that the plaintiff contracted typhoid fever from drinking Crystal Lake water.

Upon the issue of negligence, there was evidence that the Crystal Lake watershed was traversed by several highways; that there were a number of farmhouses on it, some of which were located within a few hundred feet of the reservoir or its tributaries; that the character of the run-off from the watershed was such as to make it probable that infected matter deposited near the reservoir or its tributaries would pollute the water supply; that the presence of a permanent farming population and of such transient visitors as might be expected in such a neighborhood carried with it a continuing possibility that typhoid infection would be deposited somewhere on the watershed; that there were at least...