Wilton v. City of Spokane

Washington Supreme Court
132 P. 404, 1913 Wash. LEXIS 1648, 73 Wash. 619 (1913)
ELI5:

Rule of Law:

An independent contractor remains liable to third parties for injuries caused by negligently creating a condition that is imminently dangerous to human life, and this liability continues even after the property owner has accepted the contractor's work. A property owner, however, is not liable for such a hidden danger created by its contractor if the owner had no actual or constructive knowledge of it.


Facts:

  • The City of Spokane hired Foster & Hindle, an independent contractor, to improve a city street, which required blasting a ledge of rock.
  • During the work, a charge of dynamite placed by Foster & Hindle failed to explode.
  • Instead of removing the unexploded dynamite, Foster & Hindle concealed it by building the surface of the street over it.
  • The City of Spokane accepted the completed work without any knowledge of the hidden, unexploded blast.
  • Months later, the Washington Water Power Company received a permit from the city to erect poles along the margin of the street.
  • An employee of the power company, the respondent, was drilling a hole for one of the poles when his drill struck the hidden dynamite.
  • The resulting explosion caused the respondent to lose an eye and suffer other serious injuries.

Procedural Posture:

  • The injured respondent brought an action in a trial court against the City of Spokane, Foster & Hindle, and the Washington Water Power Company.
  • The action was dismissed as to the Washington Water Power Company.
  • Following a trial, a judgment was entered against both the City of Spokane and Foster & Hindle.
  • The City of Spokane and Foster & Hindle (appellants) appealed the judgment to the state's highest court.

Locked

Premium Content

Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief

You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture

Issue:

Does an independent contractor's liability for negligently creating a hidden, imminently dangerous condition cease when the work is completed and accepted by the property owner?


Opinions:

Majority - Fullerton, J.

No. An independent contractor's liability does not cease upon acceptance of the work when the contractor's negligence creates a condition that is imminently dangerous to the lives of others. The court reasoned that there is a critical distinction between ordinary negligence in the performance of a contract and a negligent act that is imminently dangerous. For ordinary negligence, a contractor's liability to third parties ends when the owner accepts the work. However, for an imminently dangerous act, like leaving unexploded dynamite, the act is considered wholly collateral to the contract and is a wrongful act in itself. In such cases, the contractor is liable to any person injured as a result, regardless of the existence of a contract. Conversely, the City of Spokane is not liable because it had no actual or constructive knowledge of the hidden danger, and no reasonable diligence would have uncovered it. The city's duty is to maintain its streets in a reasonably safe condition, not to guarantee their safety against latent defects created by the collateral negligence of a contractor.



Analysis:

This case establishes a significant public policy exception to the traditional 'completed and accepted' rule, which historically shielded contractors from third-party liability after the project owner formally accepted the work. By distinguishing between ordinary negligence and acts 'imminently dangerous to the lives of others,' the court prevents contractors from escaping liability for creating latent, life-threatening hazards. This decision aligns with the broader trend in tort law of moving away from the strict requirement of privity of contract for liability, holding parties accountable for foreseeable harm caused by their negligence. It creates a durable duty for contractors to not leave behind hidden 'traps' for the public, even after their contractual obligations are technically fulfilled.

🤖 Gunnerbot:
Query Wilton v. City of Spokane (1913) directly. You can ask questions about any aspect of the case. If it's in the case, Gunnerbot will know.
Locked
Subscribe to Lexplug to chat with the Gunnerbot about this case.