McCoy v. Texas Power & Light Co.

Decision Date05 April 1922
Docket Number(No. 301-3612.)
Citation239 S.W. 1105
PartiesMcCOY v. TEXAS POWER & LIGHT CO.
CourtTexas Supreme Court

Action by H. D. McCoy against Texas Power & Light Company. A judgment dismissing the case, on plaintiff's refusal to amend after demurrer to his first amended original petition was sustained, was affirmed by the Court of Civil Appeals (229 S. W. 623), and plaintiff brings error. Judgments of the Court of Civil Appeals and of the district court reversed, and cause remanded to the district court for trial.

Goree, Odell & Allen, of Fort Worth, for plaintiff in error.

Templeton, Beall, Williams & Callaway, of Dallas, and S. C. Padelford, of Fort Worth, for defendant in error.

RANDOLPH, J.

This suit was filed by plaintiff against the defendant company to recover damages for the death of the plaintiff's minor son. The district court of Johnson county, before whom the case was tried, sustained a general demurrer to plaintiff's first amended original petition, and, on refusal of plaintiff to amend, dismissed the case. This action of the trial court was sustained by the Court of Civil Appeals for the Second Supreme Judicial District. 229 S. W. 623.

The proposition submitted to the Supreme Court by the application for writ of error is that the action of the trial court and Court of Civil Appeals was, and is, erroneous for the reason that the petition presents a case of actionable negligence against the defendant.

The material allegations of the petition setting forth the grounds of negligence relied on are as follows:

"That at the dates and time hereinafter alleged, the defendant was engaged in the manufacture, transmission, and sale of electricity and electrical power at various points in the state of Texas, including Cleburne and other points in Johnson county, and that for said purpose the defendant maintained and operated transmission lines running from Waco, McLennan county, Tex., by way of Cleburne in Johnson county, Tex., to Fort Worth in Tarrant county, Tex., and between various other points in said state; that said transmission lines consisted of steel frame towers, upon and to which were strung and attached what are known as high-tension wires, consisting of heavy copper wires, upon, along and through which electricity is transmitted from one station to another for the purpose of being distributed for local use for power, light and other purposes; that electricity is generated at the power stations of the defendant along its said lines and transmitted through said high-tension wires to its various substations along its said lines for the purposes above named.

"That the plaintiff is the owner of a tract of land adjoining the city of Cleburne in Johnson county, Tex., which said tract of land is and was at the dates hereinafter alleged used by him in connection with his business as a contractor and for the storage of materials used by him in connection with said business; that upon said tract of land so owned by plaintiff the defendant does, and did at the times hereinafter alleged, maintain one of the towers above referred to, said tower consisting of a framework constructed of steel bars or strips being about ____ feet high and about ____ feet square at its base, and becoming narrower as it approaches the top until it is about ____ feet square at the top of said tower, except a conical shaped cap on top of same, the upright pieces of said tower being fastened together and braced by other steel pieces or strips composing the braces holding said tower together; that at or near the top of said tower are extended certain cross-arms also constructed of steel, there being at the time hereinafter alleged three of said cross-arms extending out from said tower for a distance of about three feet on either side of same; that suspended from said cross-arms are certain insulators, and attached thereto are said large copper high-tension wires above described, there being six of said wires suspended from and attached to the cross-arms on said tower, three of the same being on either side thereof; that on one corner of said tower are attached steel spikes or projections from the steel pieces forming one of the upright corners of said tower, placed thereon for the purpose of forming a ladder upon said tower; that said spikes, together with the braces forming said tower, as above described, form a continual ladder from a point a few inches from the ground to the top of said tower.

"That at the dates and times hereinafter alleged the defendant transmitted upon and along and upon said wires above described a great amount of high-tension electricity, and that by reason thereof said towers constituted a very dangerous place; that the amount of the electricity in said wires was so great that it was unnecessary for persons to come in actual contact with the wires conducting such electricity in order to become affected thereby; but that there were certain zones and distances from said wires, within which, under certain conditions, the effect of said electricity could be felt and within which it was dangerous to human life to come.

"That said towers above described, together with said high-tension wires thereon above referred to, had been placed upon plaintiff's said tract of land during the year 1913, and that such towers as a means of transmitting high-tension electricity had never been theretofore used upon plaintiff's said property or in the vicinity thereof, or in the locality in which same was situated, and that the nature of said towers and the wires carried thereupon and the great force and danger incident thereto were not understood by the people of that locality, and particularly by children of tender years and lack of experience; and that the dangers incident to said towers without coming in contact with the wires thereupon by reason of the great amount of electricity being carried by said wires was not known to or understood by the public and particularly by children and persons of tender age and lack of experience living in the vicinity of said towers; that as constructed the said wires carrying said electricity were placed outside of said towers and some distance therefrom, and that the danger incident to coming within the space between said wires or within the zone of said electricity, without coming in direct contact with said wires, was not known or understood by the public in that vicinity and particularly to children and persons of tender years and lack of experience in that locality, and by the plaintiff's son hereinafter referred to; that by reason of the peculiar constructions of said towers hereinbefore described and referred to and the ease of access to all parts of said towers by reason of said spikes constituting a ladder thereon as hereinbefore described, and by reason of the apparent security of same and the lack of danger in connection therewith by reason of the fact that said wires carrying said electricity were located outside of the said towers and some distance therefrom, and by reason of the lack of knowledge and information on the part of the public with reference to the great danger of coming within the zone of said high-tension electricity without coming in direct contact with the said wires, and by reason of the fact that said towers were novel and new structures, and by reason of the failure of the defendant to place any warning signs upon said tower or to in any wise advise the public of dangers thereto, as hereinafter alleged, said towers constituted an attractive nuisance and a constant invitation to the public and particularly to children and persons of tender years and lack of experience to climb said towers; that by reason of all of the matters hereinbefore alleged, and particularly by reason of their recent construction and use, and by reason of the fact that said ladder on said tower above described and referred to was left upon and exposed and easily accessible to children and the public generally, that said towers were on account of their nature and surroundings, especially and unusually calculated to and did attract children and persons of tender years and lack of experience and induced them to go upon said premises and climb said towers; that such towers were therefore an unusual attraction for children and other persons unacquainted with the dangers of using same as above set out and with the existence of the danger zones above referred to; that it was well known to the defendant at said time that said conditions existed and that said tower above referred to upon plaintiff's said land was attractive to children and others, and that children were constantly and frequently using said towers and climbing upon same; that, understanding said facts, the defendant negligently and carelessly failed to use any means to prevent the use of said towers by children and other persons unaccustomed to said dangers and unacquainted therewith, and negligently left the steps on said towers easily accessible to children; and that the defendant negligently and willfully failed to place upon said towers or about same or adjacent thereto any warning signs of any character advising persons on or about said premises or attracted thereon by said towers of the dangers incident to using said tower or climbing same.

"That on, to wit, the 29th day of October, 1914, plaintiff's son Wort McCoy was a boy about 14 years of age, and that on said date plaintiff's said son went to the lot owned by the plaintiff above described, in the proper discharge of his duties, for the purpose of procuring some material belonging to the plaintiff, and was rightfully upon said premises for said purpose; that while upon said premises plaintiff's said son, attracted by the condition of said tower, as above set out, and without any notice or knowledge of the probability of danger by reason thereof,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
40 cases
  • Afton Electric Co. v. Harrison
    • United States
    • Wyoming Supreme Court
    • 18 Febrero 1936
    ... ... nuisance cannot be invoked. Graves v. Washington Water ... Power Company, (Wash.) 87 P. 956; 11 L. R. A., (N. S.) ... 452, 456; Delaware ... Fruchter, 260 U.S. 141. The case of ... Simonton v. Electric Light & Power Company, 67 S.W ... 530 illustrates the doctrine of an ... L. R. 987 and 53 A ... L. R. 1350; Duron v. Iron Works, (Texas) 9 S.W.2d ... 1104, annotated 53 A. L. R. 1351; Whetherby v. Electric ... Utilities Co., 155 Minn. 293, 193 N.W. 449; McCoy v ... Tex. P. & L. Co., (Tex. Comm.) 239 S.W. 1105 (if current ... so ... ...
  • Banker v. McLaughlin
    • United States
    • Texas Supreme Court
    • 4 Febrero 1948
    ...McCord Co., Tex.Civ.App., 151 S.W. 835; Bustillos v. Southwestern Portland Cement Co., Tex.Com.App., 211 S.W. 929; McCoy v. Texas P. & L. Co., Tex.Com.App., 239 S.W. 1105, reversing Id., Tex.Civ.App., 229 S.W. 623; Galveston-Houston Electric Ry. Co. v. Reinle, 113 Tex. 456, 258 S.W. 803; Ho......
  • Salt River Valley Water Users' Association v. Compton
    • United States
    • Arizona Supreme Court
    • 16 Febrero 1932
    ... ... through receiving an electric shock from certain high-power ... transmission lines belonging to defendant. A general demurrer ... to ... Public ... Service Co., 342 Ill. 482, 174 N.E. 577; McCoy ... v. Texas P. & L. Co., (Tex. Com. App.) 239 S.W ... 1105; Hurd ... ...
  • Hoff v. Natural Refining Products Co., A--780
    • United States
    • New Jersey Superior Court — Appellate Division
    • 9 Noviembre 1955
    ...18 N.E.2d 574 (App.Ct.1939); Biggs v. Consolidated Barb-Wire Co., 60 Kan. 217, 56 P. 4, 44 L.R.A. 655 (Sup.Ct.1899); McCoy v. Texas Power & Light Co., 239 S.W. 1105 (Tex.Com. of App. and Sup.Ct.1922). Issue for court, 14 years: Louisville & N.R. Co. v. Hutton, 220 Ky. 277, 295 S.W. 175, 53 ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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