Williams v. City of Fulton

• Decision Date: 16 February 1914
• Parties: WILLIAMS v. CITY OF FULTON.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

164 S.W. 247

177 Mo. A. 177

WILLIAMS v. CITY OF FULTON.

Kansas City Court of Appeals. Missouri.

February 16, 1914.

1. ELECTRICITY (§ 19) — ACTIONS FOR INJURIES — EVIDENCE.

In an action for injuries caused by contact with electric light wires strung near the roof of a building, evidence that the wires were strung over the city by the city and evidence tending to show the exercise of authority over the wires by it was properly admitted.

2. ELECTRICITY (§ 19) — QUESTION OF FACT.

In an action for injuries caused by contact with an electric light wire while walking in the gutter at the eaves of a building, where though it was difficult to understand how plaintiff touched the wire, if his testimony that he walked along the gutter leaning over towards the roof and the testimony as to the location of the wires was to be accepted as exact, it was shown that he had to walk along the gutter in a certain position to avoid the wires, and credible witnesses saw the contact, this apparent inconsistency was a matter for the jury.

3. ELECTRICITY (§ 14) — DEGREE OF CARE REQUIRED.

Where electric light wires are strung near the sides or roofs of buildings, a high degree of care is required to protect those compelled to go near them in the performance of labor on and about such buildings.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Callaway County; D. H. Harris, Judge.

Action by Thomas Williams against the City of Fulton. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.

E. L. McCall, of Fulton, for appellant. Chas. M. Hay, of St. Louis, and H. N. Eversole, of Fulton, for respondent.

ELLISON, P. J.

Plaintiff was injured by coming in contact with an electric light wire maintained by the defendant city and charged with deadly voltage. He brought this action, alleging negligence in the lack of proper insulation, and recovered judgment in the trial court.

It will not be necessary to go into much of the detail of statement made by the parties, and we will confine ourselves to the immediate scene of the injury. Plaintiff was engaged, with others, in painting William Woods College; the building being lighted with electricity through defendant's electric plant. That part of the college known as the dining room building is two stories high with a slanting roof; there being a gutter at the eaves about a foot wide. The wires entered all the buildings; our present concern being with those which attached to a dormer window on one building and thence to a high post, ran along parallel with the gutter on the dining room roof and in such position and distance from the gutter as to make possible contact with one walking along the gutter. Plaintiff and his companion were doing the work on the side of the dining room by means of a swinging platform held by ropes and hooks; the latter being hooked over the edge of the gutter. As the work progressed, it became necessary to move the hooks, and plaintiff went to the roof of the dining room for that purpose. He walked along the gutter leaning over towards the roof with one hand touching and sliding along it and the other hand hanging by his side. As he reached the point...