Legal Opinion

Thompson v. Springfield Water Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 14, 1906No. Appeal, No. 130PublishedCited by 17 opinions

Appeal, No. 130, Jan. T., 1905, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. No. 5, Phila. Co., Sept. T., 1904, No. 572, on demurrer for defendant in case of Henry C. Thompson, Jr., v. Springfield Water Company. Trespass to recover damages for loss by fire. Before Davis, J. Demurrer to statement. Error assigned was in entering judgment for defendant on demurrer to statement.

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Stewabt,

This case can be decided in the light of our own adjudications. They will be found to be entirely adequate and satisfactory. Discussion of the many authorities of other jurisdictions which the diligence and research of counsel have brought to our notice is, therefore, unnecessary. The question for determination is the defendant’s liability for the destruction of the plaintiff’s property by fire, assuming that the proximate cause of its destruction was the insufficiency of the only available hydrants in point of location and, further, that the insufficiency was…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Carr v. Northern LibertiesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1860
  2. Grant v. City of ErieSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1871

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Doyle v. South Pittsburgh Water Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1964
  2. Printed Terry Finishing Co. v. City of LebanonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  3. Holloway v. Macon Gas Light & Water Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1909
  4. Concordia Fire Insurance v. Simmons Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1918
  5. David v. Broadway Maintenance Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1978

12 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