Vaughn v. Missouri Public Service Co.
| Decision Date | 04 May 1981 |
| Docket Number | No. WD,WD |
| Citation | 616 S.W.2d 540 |
| Parties | Jerry Michael VAUGHN and Patricia Louise Vaughn, Appellants, v. MISSOURI PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY, a Missouri Corporation, Respondent. 30925. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
William M. Austin, Welch & Austin, Kansas City, for appellants.
William H. Sanders, Sr., James Borthwich, Blackwell, Sanders, Matheny, Weary & Lombardi, Judith P. Rea, Kansas City, for respondent.
Before PRITCHARD, P. J., SWOFFORD, Senior Judge, and MURPHY, Special Judge.
The Vaughns brought this action against Missouri Public Service Company on the theory of a continuing trespass. At the close of the Vaughn's evidence the court sustained the Company's motion for a directed verdict. On this appeal the Vaughns contend they made a case on continuing trespass. Affirmed.
There is no dispute as to the facts. In 1956 the Company placed anchors and guy wires to support poles carrying the Company's electric transmission lines on land the Vaughns owned at the time of trial without any right or authority. There is no dispute that the Vaughns acquired title to their building lot in November, 1974. Nor is there any dispute that the anchors and guy wires support a permanent transmission line belonging to the Company which serves the public.
The Vaughns testified that prior to purchasing the lot in question they inspected it and observed the location of the anchors and guy wires. They proceeded with the purchase, apparently on the oral representation by someone not connected with the Company, that the anchors and guy wires would be removed. The Vaughns later constructed a house, and, in their testimony complained that the location of the anchors and guy wires interfered with the full use of their lot.
On this appeal the Vaughns contend they made a case of continuing trespass. The Vaughns rely on Cacioppo v. Southwestern Bell Tel. Co., 550 S.W.2d 919 (Mo.App.1977). That case did involve a continuing trespass because of the almost daily intrusions on the plaintiff's property by the Telephone Company's employees for the purpose of making repairs to a junction box. However, this case involves a different principle because it involves a permanent installation of a public utility line. The rule applicable to this case was stated in Harris v. L. P. and H. Construction Co., 441 S.W.2d 377, 381(2) (Mo.App.1969). In that case the court stated the rule concerning continuing trespass but pointed out the distinction between that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Rohner v. Beets
...are estimated only to the date of the bringing of each suit....’ ”) (citation omitted) (distinguished in Vaughn v. Missouri Public Service Co., 616 S.W.2d 540, 541 (Mo.App. W.D.1981) (permanent structures that create a continuing trespass permit but a single cause of action for damages)). ...
-
Rahm v. Missouri Public Service Co.
...520 S.W.2d 625, 630 (Mo.App.1975). The facts in this case are similar to and the case is governed by Vaughn v. Missouri Public Service Company, 616 S.W.2d 540 (Mo.App.1981). This court held that an action against a public utility for damages past, present and prospective accrues at the time......