Morgan v. United Gas Improvement Co.

Citations

• 214 Pa. 109
• 63 A. 417
• 1906 Pa. LEXIS 605

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Gas company — Escape of gas — Evidence—Nonsuit.</p> <p>In an action against a gas company to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained from inhaling gas which had escaped from defendants’ pipes into the plaintiff’s cellar, it appeared that plaintiff’s house was in a row of small houses, only one of which, the fourth from the plaintiff’s, was connected with defendants’ gas pipe. It appeared that two weeks prior to the accident, an odor of gas was observed in the house which was connected with the main. 'The defendant was notified of this, and its inspector examined the gas fixtures, and discovered no defects in them. The service pipes leading from the street to this house were under the control of its owner. A few hours before the accident the employees of defendant were digging in the street in front of plaintiff’s house, and while doing so, threw out with their shovels two pieces of broken gas pipe that were “rotted on one side.” It was not shown that these pieces were parts of defendants’ pipe, n'or that in size and appearance they bore any resemblance to it. No odor of gas had been observed by anyone on the street. Held, that a nonsuit was properly entered.</p> <p>Corporations manufacturing and distributing gas are held to a high degree of care in the maintenance of their pipes and are required to exercise every reasonable precaution suggested by known dangers. Where the existence of a leak is known, means should be taken at once to avoid injury, and where it should have been known that a leak was likely to occur because of the defective condition of the pipe, negligence may be imputed; but it is not reasonable to require companies to uncover their pipes without reference to the existence or nonexistence of leaks.</p>