Union Gas & Elec. Co. v. Crouch

Citation174 N.E. 6,123 Ohio St. 81
Decision Date10 December 1930
Docket NumberNo. 22251.,22251.
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Ohio
PartiesUNION GAS & ELECTRIC CO. v. CROUCH.

123 Ohio St. 81
174 N.E. 6

UNION GAS & ELECTRIC CO.
v.
CROUCH.

No. 22251.

Supreme Court of Ohio.

Dec. 10, 1930.


Error to Court of Appeals, Hamilton County.

Action by Stanley Crouch, a minor, by his mother and next friend, Grace Cummins, against the Union Gas & Electric Company. Judgment for plaintiff was reversed by the Court of Appeals, and case was remanded for new trial, and defendant brings error.-[By Editorial Staff.]

Affirmed, with instructions to enter judgment for defendant.

This cause originated in the court of common pleas of Hamilton county, Ohio, as a suit for damages for personal injuries. The action was first begun by Stanley Crouch against the Union Gas & Electric Company and Morris Callahan, an employee of the electric company, known as a ‘trouble man,’ whose duty it was to cruise in a designated district of the city of Cincinnati, to inspect arc lights and repair them, if out of order, and to make such house calls as directed. His hours were from 6 p. m. to 2 a. m., and he was forbidden to carry passengers or to enter a private house without specific order. On the night of December 5, 1927, he attended a party at the home of a fellow employee named Buschlie, which party was also attended by Stanley Crouch. Callahan, during the course of the performance of his duties, attended the party twice during the evening, and drank some home brew. On the occasion of his second visit to the party he left with Mr. and Mrs. Crouch and Mrs. Buschlie to take Mr. and Mrs. Crouch to their home, or to purchase sandwiches, the evidence being somewhat in dispute. During this trip, and while in the district where his services were to be rendered, and while driving at a reckless rate of speed, the automobile struck a light pole, and Crouch was severely injured. There was some question as to whether Callahan was on his way to the home of the Crouches, or whether he was going to a restaurant to purchase sandwiches, or whether he was going in the direction of a light which needed repair. Before the case was called for trial Callahan was dismissed from the case without prejudice, and the cause continued against the electric company. At the first trial the jury disagreed. At the second trial a verdict was rendered in favor of the plaintiff for $7,500, upon which judgment was entered.

The Court of Appeals reversed the judgment, and there is some confusion in the record as to the grounds of the reversal. In one entry which has been submitted to this court there is a mere finding of error prejudicial to the rights of the plaintiff in error in the exclusion of testimony in the court of common pleas, and the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded for new trial. In another entry submitted it is stated that there was a total failure of proof in the record that Callahan was guilty of willful and wanton negligence, or that he was at the time of the injury complained of engaged in the business of the master. The court further found that, by reason of the lower court excluding the testimony of the declarations of Callahan as to the nature of his errand, which amounted to...

To continue reading

Request your trial
27 cases
  • Morris v. Dame's ex'R
    • United States
    • Virginia Supreme Court of Virginia
    • November 16, 1933
    ...Walker Fuller, 223 Mass. 566, 112 N.E. 230; White Brainerd Service Motor Co., 181 Minn. 366, 232 N.W. 626; Union Gas & Elec. Co. Crouch, 123 Ohio St. 81, 174 N.E. 6, 74 A.L.R. 160; Bilow Kaplan, 11 N.J.Misc. 108, 164 Atl. 694; Greeson Bailey, 167 Ga. 638, 146 S.E. Case involving motorcycle ......
  • Morris v. Dame's Ex'r
    • United States
    • Virginia Supreme Court of Virginia
    • November 16, 1933
    ...223 Mass. 666, 112 N. E. 230; White v. Brainerd Service Motor Co., 181 Minn. 366, 232 N. W. 626; Union Gas & Elec. Co. v. Crouch, 123 Ohio St. 81, 174 N. E. 6, 74 A. L. R. 160; Bilow v. Kaplan, 164 A. 694, 11 N. J. Misc. 108; Greeson v. Bailey, 167 Ga. 638, 146 S E. 490 Cases involving moto......
  • Klatt v. Commonwealth Edison Co., s. 39236
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • November 19, 1965
    ...at pages 384-385. (Reporter's Notes). This position is exemplified in cases such as Union Gas [33 Ill.2d 496] & Electric Co. v. Crouch, 123 Ohio St. 81, 174 N.E. 6, 74 A.L.R. 160 (overruling the prior contrary position as announced in Higbee Co. v. Jackson, 101 Ohio St. 75, 128 N.E. 61, 14 ......
  • Liggett & Myers Tobacco Co. v. De Parcq, 9704.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)
    • September 13, 1933
    ...79 N. H. 217, 107 A. 607; Higbee Co. v. Jackson, 101 Ohio St. 75, 128 N. E. 61, 14 A. L. R. 131; Union Gas & Electric Co. v. Crouch, 123 Ohio St. 81, 174 N. E. 6, 74 A. L. R. 160; Chajnacki v. Dougherty, 254 Mich. 296, 236 N. W. 789; Rolfe v. Hewitt, 227 N. Y. 486, 125 N. E. 804, 14 A. L. R......
  • 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