Independent Oil Co., Inc. v. Broadfoot Iron Works, Inc.
| Decision Date | 09 June 1937 |
| Docket Number | 749. |
| Citation | 191 S.E. 508,211 N.C. 668 |
| Parties | INDEPENDENT OIL CO., Inc., v. BROADFOOT IRON WORKS, Inc. |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
Appeal from Superior Court, Durham County; N. A. Sinclair, Judge.
Action by the Independent Oil Company, Incorporated, against the Broadfoot Iron Works, Incorporated. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals.
Reversed.
The complaint of plaintiff is as follows:
"The plaintiff, complaining of the defendant, alleges:
1. That the Independent Oil Company, a corporation, organized and existing under the laws of the State of North Carolina, with its home office in the City of Durham, N. C., is engaged in the gasoline and oil business.
2. That the Broadfoot Iron Works, Inc., a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of North Carolina, with its home office at the foot of Church Street, in Wilmington N. C., is engaged in the construction and repair of machinery, and particularly in motor trucks and motor vehicles.
3. That the plaintiff was on the 9th day of July, 1936, at the times complained of the owner and in possession of a Butler Trailow gasoline tank, and on said date delivered it to defendant for the purpose of having said minor repairs done thereon.
4. That on the 9th day of July, 1936, the defendant corporation accepted the Butler Trailow tank delivered to it by the plaintiff, and agreed to repair the same, which consisted of welding a small leak in the bottom of said tank, for which the defendant would have charged about $25.00, and agreed to redeliver said tank repaired in the manner aforesaid to the plaintiff on the morning of July 10, 1936, in as good condition as when turned over to it by the plaintiff.
5. That the defendant held itself out as being prepared to repair tanks in that manner, and as having proper equipment and knowledge for so doing. Plaintiff delivered the tank into the possession and control of the defendant for the purpose of enabling the defendant to perform said work, as it had agreed to do, and it further agreed that it would do the said repair work and return it to the plaintiff at seven o'clock on the morning of July 10, 1936.
6. That the said tank was used for the purpose of transporting gasoline, a fact well known to the defendant.
7. That while the tank was in possession and control of the defendant for the purpose of having repairs made thereon, the defendant through its agents and employees negligently and carelessly damaged and destroyed the said tank, and when the plaintiff sent for the tank on the morning of July 10th, 1936, it was found to be destroyed and in a useless and worthless condition.
8. That the said tank cost the plaintiff $2,315.00 F. O. B. Kansas City, Missouri, and the freight on same was about $200.00, or a total cost to plaintiff of $2,515.00.
9. That the tank was bought in October, 1935; that it was kept in good condition, and worth practically as much on July 9th 1936, when delivered to the defendant as when purchased by the plaintiff in 1935, except for the minor defects which were to be repaired; that the parts that can be salvaged are probably worth about $500.00.
10. That plaintiff's damage through the negligence and carelessness of the defendant, and its servants and employees, is $2,015.00.
11. That plaintiff has made demand upon defendant that it pay the amount of damages in the sum of $2,015.00, but defendant declines and refuses to do so.
12. That the plaintiff, Independent Oil Company, Inc., has been endamaged in the destruction of its Butler Trailow tank through the defendant's negligence in permitting it to be destroyed while in its possession and control for the purpose of repairing same, for which repair work the plaintiff was to pay the defendant; that the defendant is indebted to the plaintiff in a sum equal to the value of the tank and the cost of transportation, or $2,515.00, less the salvage, or a net amount of $2,015.00 which plaintiff has demanded of the defendant and the defendant has refused to pay.
13. That the defendant negligently failed to remove the gasoline and gasoline fumes from the tank prior to undertaking to weld the leak or negligently failed to isolate the spot which was being welded by grounding its current or both, and by thus negligently failing to prepare the tank for repair, and to negligently perform the work by properly grounding its current, it caused the fumes to ignite and thereby the explosion which destroyed the tank; that the defendant failed to exercise that care for the protection of the plaintiff's property required of it as a bailee, and through its own negligence destroyed plaintiff's property, and failed to return same in good condition as it agreed to do, all to plaintiff's great damage, to-wit, in the sum of $2,015.00.
Wherefore plaintiff, Independent Oil Company, Inc., prays for judgment against defendant, The Broadfoot Iron Works, Inc., in the sum of Two Thousand, Fifteen ($2,015.00) Dollars and the costs of the action, and for such other and further relief as the plaintiff may be entitled to.
R. O. Everett, Attorney for plaintiff."
The defendant denied the material allegations of the complaint and, among other things alleged: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial