Opinion
January 10, 1957.
March 25, 1957.
Negligence — Gas companies — Explosion — Cause — Lack of proof — Practice — Proof of facts — Burden on plaintiff — Evidence — Opinion — Lack of factual basis.
In this action of trespass to recover for property damage to plaintiff's church which resulted from an explosion in an oil-burning furnace, which happened in the combustion chamber of the oil burner, and in which it appeared that in this furnace the oil was ignited by a gas pilot using gas supplied by defendant gas company; that defendant changed its gas from propane to natural gas and adjusted plaintiff's oven burners for the use of natural gas; that later on the same day a small explosion occurred in the furnace after which oil burner service men could not ignite the gas in the gas pilot; that that night defendant's employes made certain changes and adjustments to the gas pilot after which the burner functioned properly; that several hours later the damage-causing explosion happened in the combustion chamber; and it further appeared that there was no evidence as to the condition of the oil burner or the gas pilot at any time after defendant's employes replaced the pilot, no evidence that defendant's employes did not make the changes and adjustments to the gas pilot properly, no evidence of any defect in the pilot (which was owned and controlled by plaintiff), and no evidence as to what caused the explosion; and it further appeared that the trial court refused to permit opinion evidence as to the cause of the explosion on the grounds that (a) no sufficient facts were established upon which an expert opinion could be based and (b) the witnesses were not qualified to express an expert opinion; it was Held, in the circumstances, that (1) plaintiff did not meet its burden of proving that defendant was negligent; (2) since plaintiff had possession of and control over its furnace the exclusive control rule was inapplicable, and (3) the court below had properly refused to remove a compulsory nonsuit.
Mr. Justice MUSMANNO filed a dissenting opinion.
Argued January 10, 1957. Before JONES, C. J., BELL, CHIDSEY, MUSMANNO, ARNOLD, JONES and COHEN, JJ.
Appeal, No. 72, Jan. T., 1957, from order of Court of Common Pleas of Northampton County, Feb. T., 1955, No. 16, in case of First Methodist Episcopal Church v. Bangor Gas Company et al. Judgment affirmed.
Same case in court below: 7 Pa. D. C.2d 730.
Trespass for property damage. Before WOODRING, J.
Compulsory nonsuit entered; plaintiff's motion to take off nonsuit refused and final judgment entered. Plaintiff appealed.
E. G. Scoblionko, with him Scoblionko Frank, for appellant.
Clyde W. Teel, with him Fackenthal, Teel, McGiffert Danser, for appellee.
The judgment of nonsuit is affirmed on the opinion of Judge CARLETON T. WOODRING, which is reported in 7 Pa. D. C.2d 730.
When the device which is the subject of litigation is so complicated, strange, or unique, that the average layman cannot quickly or easily grasp the meaning and functioning of its mechanism, the Court should not only allow, but welcome, expert testimony which will enlighten the tribunal on the processes and forces which concatenated into the untoward event which is the basis of the lawsuit. The accident in this case was a gas explosion following upon the play, mingling and intermingling of solenoids, solenoid valves, statcontrols, protectostats, pyrostats, spuds (not potatoes), gas pilots, fire boxes, combustion chambers, propane gas, electrodes, protectorelays, transformers, gauging drills, blowbacks, and peening hammers.
In a jungle of such teratogenetic nomenclature, an expert guide is almost indispensable if one is to reach the sought-after goal of a judgment based on a precise evaluation of all elements involved. With every mark of respect for the learning of the judge who tried this case and imposed a compulsory nonsuit, I still believe that with the help of expert witnesses he might better have been able to find the lost Dr. Livingstone of the correct decision.