TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Pugh v. Tidewater Power Co.

RICHARD B. PUGH, Administrator of the Estate of RICHARD B. PUGH, JR., Deceased, v. TIDEWATER POWER COMPANY, and CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY

Pugh v. Tidewater Power Co., 75 S.E.2d 766 (N.C. 1953)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of North Carolina · State Highest Courts
Decided
May 6, 1953
Docket
No. 599
Judges
Ervin
Citations
75 S.E.2d 766237 N.C. 6931953 N.C. LEXIS 702

Opinion — EeviN

EeviN, J.

We take it for granted without so adjudging for the purpose of this particular appeal that the Tidewater Power Company was charged with notice that children were in the habit of flying kites in the vicinity of the high voltage wires by the mere circumstance that the observable remnants of a kite were hanging on the wires during several weeks next preceding the tragedy. We are nevertheless constrained to affirm the compulsory nonsuit. It is a matter of common knowledge that *695 children ordinarily use strings, which are nonconductors of electricity, in flying kites.

Watral’s Adm'r v. Appalachian Power Co., 273 Ky. 25 , 115 S.W. 2d 372 ;

Kedziora v. Washington Water Power Co., 193 Wash. 51 , 74 P. 2d 898 . The evidence at the trial did not disclose any facts sufficient to charge the Tidewater Power Company with notice that a metal wire might be put to such a use. In consequence, the tragedy was not within the reasonable anticipation of the Tidewater Power Company.

Stanley v. Smithfield, 211 N.C. 386 , 190 S.E. 207 ;

Parker v. R. R., 169 N.C. 68 , 85 S.E. 33 ;

Caraglio v. Frontier Power Co., 192 F. 2d 175 ;

Croxton v. Duke Power Co., 181 F. 2d 306 ;

Garrett v. Arkansas Power & Light Co., 218 Ark. 575 , 237 S.W. 2d 895 ;

Callaway v. Central Georgia Power Co., 43 Ga. App. 820 , 160 S.E. 703 ;

Dilley v. Iowa Public Service Co., 210 Iowa 1332 , 227 N.W. 173 ;

Fredericks’ Admr. v. Kentucky Utilities Co., 276 Ky. 13 , 122 S.W. 2d 1000 ;

Watral’s Adm’r v. Appalachian Power Co., supra; Kelley v. Texas Utilities Co.

(Tex. Civ. App.), 115 S.W. 2d 1233 ;

Kedziora v. Washington Water Power Co., supra;

18 Am. Jur., Electricity, section 53; 29 C.J.S., Electricity, section 42.

The cases invoked by the plaintiff, to wit, Benton v. Public-Service Corporation, 165 N.C. 354 , 81 S.E. 448 , and Ferrell v. Cotton Mills, 157 N.C. 528 , 73 S.E. 142 , 37 L.R.A. (N.S.) 64, are distinguishable.

Affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1953: 11957: 11962: 11971: 11979: 11980: 11983: 219532026peak 1983 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Williams v. Carolina Power & Light Co.250 S.E.2d 255 (N.C. 1979)
  2. Ingold v. Carolina Power & Light Company181 S.E.2d 173 (N.C. Ct. App. 1971)
  3. Foote v. Scott-New Madrid-Mississippi Electric Cooperative359 S.W.2d 40 (Mo. Ct. App. 1962)
  4. Davis v. Carolina Power & Light Co.76 S.E.2d 378 (N.C. 1953)
  5. Brown v. Duke Power Co.263 S.E.2d 366 (N.C. Ct. App. 1980)
  6. Philyaw v. City of Kinston98 S.E.2d 791 (N.C. 1957)

Most recent

  1. No. 82-1559707 F.2d 823 (4th Cir. 1983)
  2. Martin v. Volkswagen of America, Inc.707 F.2d 823 (4th Cir. 1983) · Dissent
  3. Brown v. Duke Power Co.263 S.E.2d 366 (N.C. Ct. App. 1980)
  4. Williams v. Carolina Power & Light Co.250 S.E.2d 255 (N.C. 1979)
  5. Ingold v. Carolina Power & Light Company181 S.E.2d 173 (N.C. Ct. App. 1971)
  6. Foote v. Scott-New Madrid-Mississippi Electric Cooperative359 S.W.2d 40 (Mo. Ct. App. 1962)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 14

DepthCaseCited by
Benton v. N.C. Pub.-Serv. Corp., 81 S.E. 448 (N.C. 1914) 34
Garrett v. Ark. Power & Light Co., 237 S.W.2d 895 (Ark. 1951) 19
Watral's Adm'r v. Appalachian Power Co., 115 S.W.2d 372 (Ky. Ct. App. 1938) 18
Kedziora v. Wash. Water Power Co., 74 P.2d 898 (Wash. 1937) 15
Callaway v. Cent. Ga. Power Co., 160 S.E. 703 (Ga. Ct. App. 1931) 14
Dilley v. Iowa Pub. Serv. Co., 227 N.W. 173 (Iowa 1929) 11
Parker ex rel. Parker v. Charlotte Elec. Ry. Co., 85 S.E. 33 (N.C. 1915) 11
Frederick's Adm'r v. Ky. Utils. Co., 122 S.W.2d 1000 (Ky. Ct. App. 1938) 10
Stanley ex rel. Stanley v. Town of Smithfield, 190 S.E. 207 (N.C. 1937) 9
Ferrell v. Dixie Cotton Mills, 157 N.C. 528 (1911) 22
Caraglio v. Frontier Power Co., 192 F.2d 175 (10th Cir. 1951) 13
Croxton v. Duke Power Co., 181 F.2d 306 (4th Cir. 1950) 12
Ferrell v. Cotton Mills, 73 S.E. 142 (N.C. 1911) 11
Kelley v. Tex. Utils. Co., 115 S.W.2d 1233 (Tex. App. 1938) 5

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list