Legal Opinion

Excavation Technologies, Inc. v. Columbia Gas Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 29, 2009No. 32 WAP 2008PublishedCited by 69 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*52 OPINION

Justice EAKIN.

Before performing excavation work for a waterline extension project, appellant requested appellee mark the locations of gas lines around the work sites pursuant to the One Call Act (Act).1 Appellee improperly marked some lines and failed to mark others. As a result, appellant struck various gas lines, which hampered its work, resulting in economic damages of $74,502.06; appellant did not any sustain physical injury or property damage.

Appellant sued appellee on a theory of negligent misrepresentation under § 552 of the Restatement (Second) of Torts,2 claiming appellee…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Robins Dry Dock & Repair Co. v. FlintSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
  2. Bilt-Rite Contractors, Inc. v. Architectural StudioSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
  3. Commonwealth v. MillerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
  4. Aikens v. Baltimore and Ohio R. Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  5. Adams v. Copper Beach Townhome Communities, L.P.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2003

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by69 opinions

  1. Tincher, T. v. Omega Flex, Inc., Aplt.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
  2. Azur v. Chase Bank, USA, National Ass'nCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2010
  3. Dittman, B., Aplt. v. UPMCSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
  4. Teva Pharm. USA, Inc. v. SandhuDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2018
  5. Knight v. Springfield HyundaiSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2013

64 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API