| OCR Text |
Show GAS COMPSI III 1 SUPREME GOURT Affirming the findings of fact, but reversing the injunction order of the Third diotrlct court, tho state supreme court yesterday handed down a decision decis-ion in the famous gas-case, that of, Hattie G. Kinsman and others against the Utah Gas & Coke company. I Associate Justice Valentino" Gideon Is author of the opinion, and it is concurred con-curred In by his associates of the court, Chief Justice John E. Frlck writing a separate opinion, In which he agrees with the others in tho main, but stating his separate views on certain cer-tain points to the controversy. Tho case is remanded to the trial court with nn order to permit amendments amend-ments to pleadings, if such be desired, de-sired, and to hear evidence In the matter mat-ter of damages, if any, claimed to have been suffered by plaintiffs, fifty-nino In number. It is ordered that a jury may be called by tho trial court, if desirable, de-sirable, to fix the amount of damages alleged to have been suffered bv each of the plaintiffs. In.his separate opinion, Chief Justice Frlck makes allusion to tho general smoke nuisance with which Sail Lako is said to he afflicted, his deductions in respeel of this situation being as follows: "While I concur in tho finding of the district court that the operation of the gas plant, and the fumes and gases arising therefrom, to some extent, at least, so interfere with tho comfortable enjoyment of life and of the property of the plaintiffs and of each, of thorn as lo render said property loss fit for habitation for residence purposes,; and that for these reasons the plaintiffs arc damaged, yet, after a careful 'consideration 'con-sideration of the evidence, I cannot yield assenL to the additional finding that plaintiffs and their families are affected in their health to a greater extent than are the inhabitants of Salt Lako City generally from tho smoke and fumes which pollutp the atmosphere at-mosphere in the city from the 'manufacturing 'manu-facturing and other plants and from private and public buildings generally. "A careful review of the medical and expert evidence convinces me that while at times the odors, fumes and gases that emanate from the gas plant aro offensive, annoying and produce discomfort, at least to some extont, yet the overwhelming weight of tho evidence is to the effect that in so far as the health is concerned tho health of tho plaintiffs and their famillqs is not affected differently or to any greater degree than is the health of tho Inhabitants generally from tho cause I have just stated. "Moreover, the evidence shows that thero are local conditions which, during dur-ing certain seasons of the year, produce pro-duce offensive odors and ' stenches which aro disagreeable, annoying and for which the defendant gas plant is not responsible." oo |
