Community Natural Gas Co. v. Lane

97 S.W.2d 703
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedOctober 14, 1936
DocketNo. 8245
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 97 S.W.2d 703 (Community Natural Gas Co. v. Lane) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Community Natural Gas Co. v. Lane, 97 S.W.2d 703 (Tex. Ct. App. 1936).

Opinions

McClendon, chief justice.

February 1-2, 1933, Mrs. Lane (the then wife of appellee) died as the result of injuries received in a gas explosion, which occurred the -previous afternoon in the kitchen of her rented apartment in- Belton. This appeal is from a judgment (upon a special issue verdict) against the gas company in favor of Lane for compensatory damages for his wife’s death, alleged to have resulted from the negligence of the gas company in permitting gas to flow into the Lane apartment.

Appellant presents a variety of issues urging 70 assignments of error which cover 61 printed pages of its brief. From -our study of the record we have concluded that the facts adduced do not show any liability on the gas company’s part; and will therefore confine this opinion to that issue.

The house involved was owned by Gil-mer. Originally it had been a single residence, but was later converted into an apartment house with two apartments. It had an east frontage; the apartments being designated as north and south, respectively. There was but one bathroom in the house, which was used by tenants of each apartment. It was situated in the south apartment. About 1928 the gas company laid its street mains and began to supply gas to domestic consumers in Belton, under city , franchise. Some time later Gilmei- employed Fellrath, an experienced plumber, to pipe the two apartments for gas. Each apartment was piped with a separate system, not connected with each other in any way. The south apartment system supplied a gas water heater in the bathroom tor bath use. Each system had a separate feed line leading to the front property line where the gas company installed a meter connected with a service line leading to the main in the street. Gilmer later employed Fellrath to install a by-pass which connected the two apartments. This by[704]*704pass tapped the bath heater line between the heater and its cutoff (globe cock), and was supplied with its own cutoff (globe cock) in the bathroom. It extended under the bathroom floor and over to and connecting with the north apartment system. This arrangement was made in order that the tenant in each apartment might heat the bath water by means of gas from his own system. It is manifest that when both of these globe cocks were open gas could freely flow from one system to the other, but with either or both closed the two systems were entirely cut off the one from the other. The situation may be readily visualized from the following house and gas line systems plan and by-pass diagram:

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Jones v. Elliott
259 S.W.2d 288 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1953)
Texas Public Service Co. v. Mireles
149 S.W.2d 298 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1941)
Community Natural Gas Co. v. Lane
133 S.W.2d 200 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1939)
Lane v. Community Natural Gas Co.
123 S.W.2d 639 (Texas Supreme Court, 1939)
Lone Star Gas Co. v. Eckel
110 S.W.2d 936 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1937)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
97 S.W.2d 703, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/community-natural-gas-co-v-lane-texapp-1936.