Davidson v. Humes

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Davidson v. Humes, 188 Pa. 335 (Pa. 1898)
41 A. 649; 1898 Pa. LEXIS 613
Dean, Fell, Green, McCollum, Mitchell, Williams

Davidson v. Humes

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

The question whether there was any negligence on the part of the defendant in conducting the shooting of the plaintiff’s well was fairly and correctly left to the jury under proper in*345structions by tbe court below. Tbe jury found a verdict in favor of the defendant and thereby determined that tbe defendant was not guilty of negligence. As there was no contract of guaranty that the well should be shot without any resulting injury, there could be no liability resulting from a breach of contract. As there was no other source of liability except these two the plaintiff could not recover. The assignments of error are all without merit and must be dismissed.

Judgment affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name
William Davidson v. R. A. Humes, trading as The Humes Torpedo Company
Cited By
3 cases
Status
Published
Syllabus
Negligence — Shoooiing oil well — Explosion of torpedo— Contract. In an action of trespass to recover damages ior injuries to an oil well by the explosion of a torpedo, whore it appeared that the defendant contracted with the plaintiff to shoot the well, but without any guaranty that the well should be shot without any resulting injury, the defendant is liable for damages only in case of negligence, the burden of proving which is on the plaintiff.