Light v. Bd. of Com'rs of Owen Cnty.

• Decision Date: 17 November 1920
• Docket Number: No. 10515.,10515.
• Citation: 74 Ind.App. 199,128 N.E. 700
• Court: Indiana Appellate Court
• Parties: SPENCER LIGHT, HEAT & POWER CO. v. BOARD OF COM'RS OF OWEN COUNTY.

74 Ind.App. 199

128 N.E. 700

SPENCER LIGHT, HEAT & POWER CO.

v.BOARD OF COM'RS OF OWEN COUNTY.

No. 10515.

Appellate Court of Indiana, Division No. 1.

Nov. 17, 1920.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Monroe County; Robert W. Meiers, Judge.

Action by Board of Commissioners of Owen County against the Spencer Light, Heat & Power Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.Homer Elliott and S. C. Kivett, both of Martinsville, and Miller & Blair, of Bloomington, for appellant.

Hickam & Hickam, of Spencer, for appellee.

REMY, J.

This appeal is from a judgment in favor of appellee for $741.94, in an action to recover overcharges alleged to have been paid by appellee because of a defective meter installed and maintained by appellant in the Owen county courthouse. The only assigned error is the court's action in overruling appellant's motion for a new trial; and the only reasons for a new trial which are properly presented for our consideration are: (1) The verdict of the jury is not sustained by sufficient evidence; and (2) error in the admission of certain evidence.

[1] The evidence discloses that appellant installed a meter in the basement of the courthouse, and began to light the courthouse with electricity on June 11, 1911. The number of lights placed in the entire building at first was 262, which number was never increased, but gradually diminished. From July 11, 1911, to June 1, 1916, appellant charged against, and collected from, appellee the total sum of $2,020.39, which was an average of $36.09 per month. During this entire period appellee was protesting that the monthly bills were too much, and paid the same under protest. In May, 1916, at the request of appellee, a representative of the Public Service Commission of Indiana made an inspection of the meter and found from such inspection, and reported to appellee, that the meter had been running fast 1.5 per cent. on heavy loads, 2.9 per cent. on one-half loads, and 23.5 per cent. on light loads. The bills of appellant showed that the meter had been registering at about the same rate during all of the time prior to May 30, 1916, the date on which a meter that registered correctly had been installed. After the installation of the new meter, and for a period of 23 months, the bills for electric current used in lighting the courthouse aggregated only $194, or $8.43 per month, although the amount of light used per month was during all of the time from July 11, 1911, substantially the same. It will be observed that the difference between the average monthly charge of $8.43 after the installation of the new meter and of the said monthly charge of $36.09 while the old meter was in use was $29.64. By this calculation, which under the evidence the jury was...