Katz v. New England Tel. & Tel. Co.

Decision Date05 March 1929
Docket NumberNo. 6563.,6563.
Citation145 A. 14
PartiesKATZ v. NEW ENGLAND TELEPHONE & TELEGRAPH CO.
CourtRhode Island Supreme Court

Exceptions from Superior Court, Providence and Bristol Counties; Herbert L. Carpenter, Judge.

Action by Rose Katz against the New England Telephone & Telegraph Company. Verdict was directed for defendant, and plaintiff excepts. Exceptions overruled, and case remitted for entry of judgment on verdict.

Walter I. Sundlun and Baker & Spicer, all of Providence, for plaintiff.

Frederick W. O'Connell, Charles E. Tilley, and Swan, Keeney & Smith, all of Providence, for defendant.

PER CURIAM. This is an action on the case for negligence to recover damages for personal injuries which plaintiff alleges she received while using one of defendant's telephone instruments.

The declaration has three counts. The first two counts allege that plaintiff, while using the telephone in her home, received therefrom an electric shock of great violence. The third count alleges that it was the duty of defendant to so manage and equip its telephone instrument, wires, and other apparatus that the plaintiff lawfully using said instrument should not be injured by the transmission of any deafening sound, noise, or explosion. The breach alleged is the negligent equipment, operation, and control of said instrument, wires, and other apparatus. Plaintiff alleges that, while she was using the telephone, she was injured by the transmission from the receiver to her ear of a deafening sound, noise, or explosion which caused a severe nervous shock and injury to her ear.

At the conclusion of the evidence, the trial justice directed a verdict for the defendant. The case is in this court on the plaintiff's bill of exceptions; the only exception is to the direction of a verdict.

There is no evidence that plaintiff received any electric shock from the telephone, and the first two counts of the declaration are thus eliminated. The only count which requires consideration is the third, in which plaintiff's claim is based on an alleged injury caused by a loud noise which came through the receiver.

Plaintiff, a married woman over 40 years of age, and the mother of several children, lives at 124 Robinson street. Providence. In her home there was a telephone of the ordinary type. On the evening of the 21st of January, 1923, plaintiff was called by telephone by a friend who lived in another part of the city. After the exchange of a few words with her friend, plaintiff says that suddenly there was a loud noise in the receiver of her telephone. She described it as like a shot from a revolver. She became hysterical, and does not remember anything for several hours thereafter. Her friend, Mrs. Landzberg, who was talking at the other end of the line, testified that she heard a noise which sounded something like a shot or like an automobile blowout. Mrs. Landzberg attempted to continue her conversation, and plaintiff's son spoke to her, and told her he could not talk with her then, as there was something wrong with his mother. Plaintiff's telephone was used that evening to call a doctor, and there was no interruption in the use of this telephone at any time. No report was made after this occurrence to the defendant company until the following March. The telephone company was then informed of plaintiff's claim. A thorough inspection was at once made of plaintiff's telephone equipment and all connecting wires which were found to be in good order and without need of repair. Although the amount of evidence in the case is large, there is really no conflict when the proof is considered except with respect to the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Reid v. Owens
    • United States
    • Utah Supreme Court
    • August 31, 1939
  • McDowell v. Southwestern Bell Tel. Co.
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • December 7, 1976
    ...266. See also Hanaman v. New York Tel. Co., 278 App.Div. 875, 104 N.Y.S.2d 315 (1951). The defendant relies on Katz v. New England Telephone & Telegraph Co., 145 A. 14 (R.I.1929), which held that the plaintiff could not use the res ipsa doctrine in an acoustical trauma case. In Katz, the pl......
  • Riley v. Tsagarakis
    • United States
    • Rhode Island Supreme Court
    • March 6, 1929
  • Gandy v. Southwestern Bell Tel. Co.
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • November 23, 1960
    ...telephone call. On the whole record therefore, we think the case was for the jury.' Defendant relies upon Katz v. New England Telephone & Telegraph Co., R.I., 145 A. 14, but in that case the Court held that the noise did not in fact occur. Here, however, two witnesses and a written report b......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT