Miner v. Franklin County Telephone Co.
Supreme Court of Vermont
Case for negligence. Plea, the general issue. Trial by jury at the September Term, 1908, Franklin County, Powers, J., presiding. Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff. The defendant excepted. Here the defendant required the plaintiff to work near wires carrying a high and dangerous voltage of electricity and was required to exercise a very high degree of care in the performance of its duty to the plaintiff. 2 Jagg Torts, 864; Girandi v. Imp.
Read the full summary
Case for negligence. Plea, the general issue. Trial by jury at the September Term, 1908, Franklin County, Powers, J., presiding. Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff. The defendant excepted. Here the defendant required the plaintiff to work near wires carrying a high and dangerous voltage of electricity and was required to exercise a very high degree of care in the performance of its duty to the plaintiff. 2 Jagg Torts, 864; Girandi v. Imp. Go., 107 Cal. 120; Clements et ux. v. Lotdsiana Electric Light Go., 44 La. Ann. 692; Ennis v. Gray, 87 Hun. 355; Moran v. Corliss Steam Engine Co., 21…
1Opinion of the CourtMunson, J.
The plaintiff, an employee of the defendant telephone company, was injured while on a pole of the Vermont Power and Manufacturing Company, by coming in contact with the electric wires of the power company. The defendant telephone company and the Vermont Power and Manufacturing Company were respectively the successors of the New England Telephone Company and the St. Albans Electric Light and Power Company, and as such took the respective rights of those companies under an agreement they had regarding the use of their plants. This agreement provided that either party might attach its wires to…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. ArchibaldSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
- Drown v. New England Telephone & Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1907
- Vaillancourt v. Grand Trunk Railway Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1909
- Robinson v. St. Johnsbury & Lake Champlain RailroadSupreme Court of Vermont · 1907
- McKane v. Marr & GordonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1904
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Hartz v. Hartford Faience Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1916
- Ex Parte Majestic Coal Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1922
- Spooner v. Detroit Saturday Night Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1915
- Citizens Telephone Co. v. PrickettIndiana Supreme Court · 1919
- Tinney v. CrosbySupreme Court of Vermont · 1941
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.