From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ernst v. General Refractories Co.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit
Feb 9, 1953
202 F.2d 485 (6th Cir. 1953)

Opinion

No. 11654.

February 9, 1953.

Jesse K. Lewis, Lexington, Ky., for appellant.

Thomas D. Theobald, Jr., Grayson, Ky., and LeWright Browning, Ashland, Ky., for appellee.

Before MARTIN, McALLISTER and MILLER, Circuit Judges.


This cause was considered by the Court on the record, briefs and oral argument of counsel for the respective parties;

And the Court being of the opinion that the findings of fact of the District Judge are fully supported by the evidence and are not clearly erroneous, and are accordingly accepted on this appeal;

And, that the relocation and construction of State Highway No. 174 was the official act of the Highway Department of the Commonwealth of Kentucky acting through the appellee by virtue of its contract with the appellee, and that any damage resulting to appellant's property by reason thereof, appellant's action not being based on any alleged negligence on the part of the appellee, is not chargeable to the appellee; Miller Construction Co. v. Collins, 269 Ky. 670, 108 S.W.2d 663; Combs v. Codell Construction Co., 244 Ky. 772, 52 S.W.2d 719;

And, being further of the opinion that evidence on behalf of the appellee with respect to the unprecedented nature of the rainfall and resulting flood was properly admitted even though such fact was not pleaded by it as an affirmative defense; Chesapeake Ohio Ry. Co. v. Carmichael, 298 Ky. 769, 184 S.W.2d 91; Rule 15(b), Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A.; Hutchins v. Akron, Canton Youngstown R. Co., 6 Cir., 162 F.2d 189, 192;

And, that because of the unprecedented nature of the rainfall and resulting flood, except for which the damage to appellant would not have occurred, the appellee is not liable for such damage; Chesapeake Ohio Railway Co. v. Carmichael, supra; Fife v. Chesapeake Ohio Railway Co., 307 Ky. 541, 211 S.W.2d 854; Russell Fork Coal Co. v. Hawkins, 311 Ky. 449, 223 S.W.2d 887.

It is ordered that the judgment of the District Court be affirmed.


Summaries of

Ernst v. General Refractories Co.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit
Feb 9, 1953
202 F.2d 485 (6th Cir. 1953)
Case details for

Ernst v. General Refractories Co.

Case Details

Full title:ERNST v. GENERAL REFRACTORIES CO

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit

Date published: Feb 9, 1953

Citations

202 F.2d 485 (6th Cir. 1953)

Citing Cases

Chesney v. Tennessee Valley Authority

Id. at 1264-66. The Green court also cited to Ernst v. Gen. Refractories Co., 202 F.2d 485 (6th Cir. 1953), a…

Rich v. Pappas

We are of the opinion that the issue of whether the appellees were actually holders in due course was one of…