Kuhlman v. Water, Light & Transit Co.

• Decision Date: 16 March 1925
• Docket Number: No. 24669.,24669.
• Citation: 271 S.W. 788
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court
• Parties: KUHLMAN v. WATER, LIGHT & TRANSIT CO.

271 S.W. 788

KUHLMAN v. WATER, LIGHT & TRANSIT CO.

No. 24669.

Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 1.

March 16, 1925.

Rehearing Denied April 13, 1925.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Chariton County; Fred Lamb, Judge.

Action by Mary Kuhlman against the Water, Light & Transit Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Reversed and remanded.

Collett & McKittrick, of Salisbury, F. C. Sasse, of Brunswick, and Conkling & Withers and S. J. & G. C. Jones, all of Carrollton, for appellant.

Jno. D. Taylor, of Keytesville, for respondent.

SEDDON, C.

Suit for damages for personal injuries. Plaintiff's petition alleges that during the year 1917 the Brunswick Light & Water Company built transmission lines from Brunswick to Keytesville, by way of Dalton, Mo., for the purpose of transmitting electric current from Brunswick to Keytesville and Dalton to supply the inhabitants of said towns and persons living along the route of said lines with electric current for lighting and mechanical purposes; that said Brunswick Light & Water Company entered into an agreement with plaintiff and her husband wherein said company agreed to furnish a transformer, all wiring, equipment, and fixtures necessary for wiring and equipping plaintiff's home, together with competent and experienced men to do said work, for which plaintiff's husband was to pay the reasonable cost, and thereafter said company was to furnish electric current to be used in said home for lighting and mechanical purposes, and said company agreed to inspect and keep said transformer in proper operating condition and to furnish skilled and experienced men for the purpose of making inspection of said wiring and equipment used in said home, regulating and correcting any trouble that might arise from time to time and making any and all repairs that might be necessary; that thereafter the Brunswick Light & Water Company sold its plant, lines, and other equipment to defendant, which has since continued to operate said electric plant by means of said transmission lines, and defendant has since said date continued to furnish electric current and to furnish the service of persons for the purpose of making repairs, correcting trouble, and making inspections to plaintiff and her husband at their home near Dalton, conducting and carrying on the agreement theretofore made with the Brunswick Light & Water Company; that on the _____ day of June, 1921, either because defendant was permitting an unusual and excessive amount of current to come from its transmission lines through said transformer and into plaintiff's home, or because of some defect in wiring and equipment in said home, the electric current was escaping or charging parts of said equipment with which it was necessary to come in contact in using same, so that a person would receive a shock when using same; that immediately upon discovery of said condition plaintiff communicated the fact to defendant by notifying the person in charge of its office at Brunswick, and within a short time thereafter defendant's manager sent certain employees to plaintiff's home for the purpose of making inspection and repairing and correcting the defective condition; that they made certain changes, corrections, and repairs on said occasion, but failed to correct the defective condition; that plaintiff thereafter, on a number of times, notified defendant of such conditions, and called upon it to repair and correct such conditions so that said appliances could be used in the usual and ordinary manner safely and without damage to persons and property, and defendant's manager at Brunswick caused certain employees to come to the premises and to make an inspection of the equipment, appliances, fixtures, and wiring therein for the purpose of correcting and repairing the conditions existing in plaintiff's home, and on said date, after having made certain tests, repairs, and changes as they deemed necessary, said employees made a test of the equipment, appliances, and fixtures installed in said home, and informed plaintiff that the defective condition had been remedied, and that the wires, fixtures, equipment, and appliances were in a safe condition to be used in the usual and ordinary manner for which they were intended; that within the period of about one hour thereafter plaintiff undertook to use an electric iron, a part of said equipment and appliances, and because defendant, its servants, and employees negligently permitted and caused current in dangerous and deadly amount to pass over the wires and through the equipment into said home, because of their failure to properly and carefully inspect and repair the wires, equipment, and appliances in said home, and because of negligently failing to furnish persons possessing the proper and necessary skill in making such inspection and repairs, plaintiff, while using said electric iron received a severe shock by a charge of electric current passing over and through said wires, appliances, and equipment as to render her unconscious and so that her left hand was seriously burned and injured, resulting in its amputation, and she was otherwise severely burned about her back and body and suffered a severe nervous shock; and that plaintiff was injured because of the negligence and carelessness of defendant, its servants and employees, as aforesaid, in permitting excessive and dangerous amount of electric current to pass from its transmission lines over and through the wires, equipment, and appliances in said home, and because of their negligence and carelessness in failing to make proper inspection and proper repair of said electrical appliances, and because of lack of skill and knowledge on the part of defendant's agents who attempted to inspect and repair its said lines and the wires, equipment, fixtures, and appliances in said home.

Defendant's answer is a general denial and plea of contributory negligence.

The trial resulted in a verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $10,000, and, after unsuccessfully seeking a new trial, defendant appeals.

Plaintiff lived on a farm about 1¾ miles west of Dalton and about 7 miles from Brunswick. The Brunswick Light & Water Company, in 1916 or 1917, constructed a transmission line along the road west of plaintiff's home. In the fall of 1917 plaintiff's house was wired for electric lights under arrangement made with a Mr. Nickell, working for the Brunswick Light & Water Company. Plaintiff and her husband purchased, paid for, and owned the transformer, the wires running from the transformer to the house, the wires in the house and the fixtures, including the electric iron, and the Brunswick Light & Water Company installed them. In November, 1920, Albert Wires, defendant's manager at Brunswick, with some helpers, extended the electric wires from the north side of the house to a pecan tree about 30 or 40 yards northeast of the house, and near which was a chicken house, and from that tree west about 100 feet to a garage. Defendant mailed plaintiff's husband a bill for the cost of the wiring and equipment and the work of installing the same, which bill was paid by plaintiff at defendant's office in Brunswick on December 10, 1920, and defendant's receipt taken therefor. Plaintiff's injuries occurred on Thursday, June 30, 1921, about 4 o'clock in the afternoon. She testified that, on the Monday before, she had been using an electric washing machine, when a storm came up and she switched off the current. About two hours after the storm she reached up to turn the switch on and there was not any current. She then called the light office at Brunswick and asked for defendant's manager, Wires, and told him there was no current, and asked him what the trouble was. He told plaintiff it was probably due to a fuse blowing out of the transformer. She asked if he could send a man, and he told her the roads were very bad, but as soon as they could get to it they would sent a man. On Tuesday plaintiff telephoned Wires again and asked if he would send a man. He said he would, and about 11 o'clock Tuesday morning two workmen came to the house and asked what the trouble was. Plaintiff told them she did not know, only there was not any current. One of the men called the light office on the telephone and asked them to shut off the current. The other workman went to the transformer, and when he came back one man pressed a push button and the lights came on and the men left. Immediately after dinner, plaintiff, intending to complete the washing, reached up and switched on the current and it "shocked her." She then stepped over to the machine, started the wringer in motion, and reached down in the tub to get a garment and put it on the wringer, and, as she said:

"I clung to it—couldn't let go. The cord was very long and very heavy, and sometimes while at work I would find it on the floor. While still hanging to that it drew me down on the washing machine. I reached out with my foot and pulled the cord. Of course, that stopped the motor."

She then called Mr. Wires on the telephone and reported the trouble and asked him to send a man. Plaintiff testified:

"There was such a peculiar noise through the house, and that worried me. Whenever 1 touched the buttons, just touching them would shock me."

On Thursday afternoon, about 3 o'clock, two workmen came and asked what the trouble was. Plaintiff told them she "didn't know, only that everything I touched shocked me." The first thing they did was to attach something to the meter, which was on the east porch of the house about 3 feet from the washing machine. They switched on the current, and one of the men told plaintiff "it stung him. He put a plug in and waited awhile, and then he told me that there must be a light on somewhere; said the current was being consumed. I went over the house to make sure there was no light on. I came back and reported there wasn't." The workmen then left the house and went out to the henhouse and the...