Standard Oil Co. v. Murray

• Decision Date: 07 October 1902
• Docket Number: 869.
• Parties: STANDARD OIL CO. v. MURRAY. [a1]
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit

119 F. 572

STANDARD OIL CO. v. MURRAY. ^[a1]

No. 869.

United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.

October 7, 1902

Alfred D. Eddy, for plaintiff in error.

R. M Wing and T. L. Chadbourne, for defendant in error.

The defendant in error, Frank Murray, brought suit in trespass on the case against the Standard Oil Company for personal injuries received by him while in the service of George C Newberry & Co. as an engineer at a certain building in the city of Chicago. The first count of the declaration charges that Murray was an engineer in the service of Newberry & Co. and in charge of a stationary engine; that the Standard Oil Company on the 7th day of May, 1896, sold to his employer a certain quantity of oil designed for lubricating purposes commonly known as 'external engine oil'; that such oil, when property manufactured and refined, will not under normal conditions, or when submitted to a moderate degree of heat or pressure, generate an inflammable or explosive gas; that the Standard Oil Company represented that the oil was of the usual and ordinary kind, and would not under ordinary conditions, or under a moderate degree of pressure or heat, generate or collect inflammable or explosive gas; that, notwithstanding, the oil purchased was of an impure and adulterated character, so that it evaporated, and generated and caused to be accumulated in the tank in which it was contained an inflammable and explosive gas; that on the 21st of July, 1896, while he was in the exercise of due care and engaged in the duties of his employment, there was a violent explosion of gas which had been generated and collected in the tank in which the oil was contained, whereby he was severely burned and scorched, and sustained injuries, etc. The second count charges that the Standard Oil Company was engaged in the business of manufacturing, refining, handling, and selling oil; that Murray was employed as engineer as stated in the first count; that the Standard Oil Company on the 7th of May sold to his employer for the purposes stated a certain quantity of oil designed for oiling and lubricating purposes; that the oil was of a vaporous and volatile character, likely to generate inflammable or explosive, gas, as the Standard Oil Company then well knew or by the exercise of reasonable care might have known; that the company well knew that the oil was to be stored and kept in the engine room of the premises and was to be used in oiling the engine and machinery; that it was the duty of the company to warn Murray of the dangerous properties of the oil and that it was likely to evaporate and to generate inflammable or explosive gas in the tank wherein it was contained, but that the company wholly disregarded and neglected its duty and failed and omitted, in selling the oil, to warn Murray of its dangerous properties; that while he was in close proximity to the oil then remaining unused, and while in the exercise of due care, a large quantity of gas which had been generated and collected from the oil, ignited from a lighted match which Murray held in his hand, and thereupon the oil burned with a violent and explosive effect, whereby Murray sustained injuries, etc. At the trial, upon conclusion of the evidence, the Standard Oil Company requested the court to direct the jury to return a verdict for the defendant, which motion was overruled, and an exception to the ruling was duly preserved. A verdict was returned for the plaintiff below, and from a judgment rendered upon the verdict a writ of error is sued out by the Standard Oil Company.

The facts disclosed by the evidence are substantially without dispute. The Standard Oil Company on the 5th of May, 1896 sold to Newberry & Co. one barrel of 'Renown Engine Oil,' the highest grade of lubricating oil manufactured by the company. It has a fire test of 425 degrees Fahrenheit, at which it burns. The oil was delivered on the 7th of May, 1896, and was pumped by Murray into a tank. The tank had no locks or padlocks. It had a hood, which could be pushed back, and upon the inside was a trap door, which could be lifted on a hinge; the pump being inserted into the barrel through the trap. Murray testified that up to the day of the accident he saw nothing to indicate that there was any gas about the oil, and he saw nothing to indicate anything injurious in connection with it. He drew from this tank of oil two or three times a day each day from May 8th until June 21st, at which time there was left of the original fifty-two gallons in the tank from five to fifteen gallons of the oil. The tank containing the oil was placed about twenty-five feet from the boiler and at the back end of the building. This boiler room was lighted with a gasoline torch and gasoline was used for that purpose during the time in question. The gasoline was kept in a barrel situated in the front basement of the building and was pumped directly into the gasoline torch through a funnel. Until the date of the injury Murray had no occasion to and did not use a light in the tank. On July 21, 1896, Murray lifted the hood and the inside cover of the oil tank, lighted a match, and leaned over the tank to ascertain the quantity of oil remaining therein, whereupon there was an explosion which threw him about seven feet against an engine, whereby he sustained injury. It was shown by the defendant that 'Renown Engine Oil,' such as was sold to Newberry & Co., is made from a high boiling...