Stoner v. Pennsylvania Fuel Supply Co.

Citations

• 40 Pa. Super. 599
• 1909 Pa. Super. LEXIS 645

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Natural gas company — Explosion of gas — Evidence—Contributory negligence — Case for fury.</p> <p>1. In an action against a natural gas company to recover damages for injuries arising from an explosion of gas in plaintiff’s cellar, the case is for the jury where there is evidence tending to show that the gas could only have come from one of defendant’s gas lines, and that it could have escaped from a break in such line.</p> <p>2. In such a case the plaintiff’s contributory negligence is also for the jury where the evidence shows that the plaintiff lighted a match in the cellar; that the service pipes in the cellar were in a good condition; that there was a large amount of cubic air therein; that there were five open windows, an open cellar door and an outside door full of cracks; that there was an open gaslight burning in the cellar a few feet from the point of explosion; and that plaintiff’s method of ascertaining the source of the leak was a proper one according to expert testimony.</p> <p>3. In such a case an employee of the defendant is not competent to express an opinion that it was impossible for gas to escape from defendant’s line into plaintiff’s cellar, where he gives no facts upon which such an opinion may be stated.</p>