Jennings v. Davis
Citations
- 187 F. 703
- 109 C.C.A. 451
- 1911 U.S. App. LEXIS 4213
Syllabus
<p>1. Mines and Minerals (§ 12:1*) — Degrees of Care — Operation of Pipe June.</p> <p>The owner of a pipe line used for the transportation of petroleum, the escape of oil from which limy cause damage to the property of others, is not bound to the exercise of such a high degree of care as will absolutely prevent the leakage of such oil under any circumstances, but the measure of care required, as in all other cases, is that which would be exercised by a man of ordinary prudence under the same circumstances and conditions if the whole risk were his own.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Mines and Minerals, Dee. Dig. § 121.*]</p> <p>2. Mines and Minerals (§ 125*) — Evidence—Happening of Accident.</p> <p>The mere fact that leakage in an oil pipe line was caused by the blowing out of a rubber gasket between the two parts of a joint does not constitute evidence of negligence in the construction or operation of the pipe line or in the quality of the materials used, and the owner cannot be held liable for damage caused to the property of another by such leakage without evidence of negligence in one or the other of such particulars.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Mines and Minerals, Dec. Dig. § 125.*]</p> <p>3. Mines and Minerals (§ 121*) — Pipe Line — Negligence.</p> <p>Plaintiff owned buildings near defendants’ pipe line, one of which was occupied by a third person as a blacksmith shop. The blowing out of a gasket from a pipe joint in the evening caused a leakage of oil which spread over the ground around and under plaintiff’s buildings. When the blacksmith came to his shop in the morning there was oil under it, the floor being two feet from the ground, and also in front where he was compelled to walk through it. He started a fire, heated a piece of iron, and cut off a piece on the anvil, and allowed such piece, which was red hot, to fall through a crack in the floor where it set fire to the oil and plaintiff’s buildings were destroyed. Held that, aside fr
Judges: Connor
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
11 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Clark v. E. I. du Pont de Nemours Powder Co.Supreme Court of Kansas· 1915-02-06· cited 61×
- Brewer v. Appalachian Constructors, Inc.West Virginia Supreme Court· 1951-05-08· cited 50×
- Norfolk & W. Ry. Co. v. Amicon Fruit Co.Fourth Circuit· 1920-11-09· cited 21×
- Ward v. Inter-Island Steam Navigation Co.Hawaii Supreme Court· 1914-03-17· cited 14×
- Pattison v. DaleSixth Circuit· 1912-04-11· cited 8×
- Southern Pacific Co. v. RalstonTenth Circuit· 1933-01-20· cited 5×
- Texas Gulf Sulphur Co. v. Portland Gas Light Co.First Circuit· 1932-04-07· cited 4×
- Norfolk & W. Ry. Co. v. HauserFourth Circuit· 1913-03-11· cited 4×
- Kirwin v. Mexican Petroleum Co.D. Rhode Island· 1920-07-24· cited 4×
- Stanolind Oil & Gas Co. v. BrownFifth Circuit· 1932-12-21· cited 2×
- American Barge Line Co. v. Stoll Oil Refining Co.W.D. Kentucky· 1938-03-30· cited 2×
Cites
9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Milwaukee & Saint Paul Railway Co. v. KelloggSupreme Court· 1877-04-30· cited 880×
- Railroad Co. v. JonesSupreme Court· 1877-12-10· cited 239×
- Scheffer v. Railroad Co.Supreme Court· 1882-04-10· cited 172×
- Atchison, Topeka, & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. CalhounSupreme Court· 1909-02-23· cited 122×
- Cole v. German Savings & Loan Soc.Eighth Circuit· 1903-07-23· cited 94×
- Goodlander Mill Co. v. Standard Oil Co.Seventh Circuit· 1894-05-31· cited 62×
- Teis v. Smuggler Mining Co.Eighth Circuit· 1907-12-09· cited 33×
- Fawcett v. Railway Co.West Virginia Supreme Court· 1884-11-01· cited 17×
- Triple-State Natural Gas & Oil Co. v. WellmanCourt of Appeals of Kentucky· 1902-10-29· cited 11×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.