Arnold v. Northeastern Pennsylvania Telephone Co.

Citations

• 253 Pa. 23
• 97 A. 1038
• 1916 Pa. LEXIS 776

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Master and servant — Telephone companies — Defective pole — Duty to inspect — Injury to lineman — Contributory negligence — Assumption of rislc — Case for jury.</p> <p>1. It is the duty of a telephone company to inspect its poles and lines and to maintain them in a safe condition as to the public and its employees.</p> <p>2. In an action against a telephone company brought by a lineman in its employ to recover damages for personal injuries'resulting from the breaking of a pole upon which plaintiff had climbed in the course of his duty, the case was for the jury and a verdict and judgment for the plaintiff will be sustained where it appears that the pole had rotted below the surface of the ground, although otherwise presenting a sound appearance; that it had not been inspected for more than ten years; that it was no part of plaintiff’s duty to inspect poles; and that the breaking of the pole was caused by such defective condition.</p> <p>3. In such case there was no assumption of risk on the part of the plaintiff.</p>