Wood v. Diamond Electric Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Wood v. Diamond Electric Co., 185 Pa. 529 (Pa. 1898)
39 A. 1111; 1898 Pa. LEXIS 746
Fell, Green, McCollum, Mitchell, Sterrett

Wood v. Diamond Electric Co.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

We find nothing in the evidence tending to prove that the proximate cause of the death of plaintiff’s husband was the defendant company’s negligence. On the contrary, it clearly *531appears that his death was the result of his own voluntary, deliberate act in touching the screen heavily charged with electricity, in the face of ample notice that it was so charged. His evident purpose, in thus touching the screen, was to demonstrate that those who asserted it was thus charged were mistaken. Further reference to the evidence is unnecessary. It was clearly insufficient to carry the case to the jury, and hence, there was no error in refusing to take off the judgment of non-suit entered by the learned president of the court below at the trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name
Annie Wood v. Diamond Electric Company
Cited By
3 cases
Status
Published
Syllabus
Negligence — Contributory negligence — Electricity—Death—Nonsuit. In au action against an electric light company to recover damages for death, a nonsuit is properly entered where the evidence shows that the deceased had placed a wire screen around the side of his photograph gallery near defendant’s electric wires; that one of defendant’s wires, which had lost part of its insulating material, had chai’ged the screen with electricity ; that deceased, upon being informed that another person who had come in contact with the screen had been killed, deliberately touched the screen to demonstrate that those who asserted that it was charged wore mistaken.