Engman v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co.

I respectfully dissent.

As pointed out in the majority opinion, both counts of Engmans’ amended petition are posited upon the theory that in entering the apartment to remove the telephone equipment (for non-payment of service) Bell’s serviceman committed a trespass, and that doing so constituted a willful and wanton invasion of the Engmans’ right of privacy.

Notwithstanding the existing tariff provision,1 the majority opinion, as best comprehended, concludes that since Bell’s serviceman intentionally entered the apartment,2 doing so constituted a willful and wanton trespass, and, relying upon…