JAIMIE L. ECKROTH, ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF DOLORES LEONA HAMMOND DECEASED, KIMBERLY ANN BRANTER, ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF JORDAN

JAIMIE L. ECKROTH, ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF DOLORES LEONA HAMMOND DECEASED, KIMBERLY ANN BRANTER, ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF JORDAN MICHAEL ENGLISH, A MINOR, DECEASED, RONALD DEPTO AND DEBBIE DEPTO, CO-ADMINISTRATORS OF THE ESTATE OF LINDSEY A. DEPTO, DECEASED, AND RONALD DEPTO AND DEBBIE DEPTO, IN THEIR OWN RIGHT, AND CHELSEY HAMMOND, A MINOR, BY HER PARENT AND NATURAL GUARDIAN, TIMOTHY J. HAMMOND, AND TIMOTHY J. HAMMOND, IN HIS OWN RIGHT v. PENNSYLVANIA ELECTRIC, INC., A CORPORATION, D/B/A PENELEC v. DAVID GUNTHER, JOHN ("JACK") SEXTON, INTERACTIVE PERFORMANCE, INC., AND OUTSOURCING SOLUTIONS, INC. No. 1934 WDA 2009 2010 PA Super 235 Atlantic: n/a Filed: 12/17/2010
	Appeal from the Order October 28, 2009 In the Court of Common Pleas of Cambria County Civil Division at No(s): Case No. 4842-2005
Before: STEVENS, OLSON, and OTT, JJ.
Opinion by: STEVENS, J.
This is one of four appeals taken from the October 28, 2009 order entered by the Court of Common Pleas of Cambria County, which, sitting en banc, granted summary judgment in favor of Defendant/Appellee Pennsylvania Electric, Inc. (“Penelec”) and dismissed Plaintiff/Appellants’ wrongful death/negligence action. By a 2-1 decision, the court determined that the fatal house fire from which this sad and tragic case arises was not proximately caused by Penelec’s allegedly negligent termination of electrical power to the home two days earlier. While it is foreseeable that a resident might light a candle to illuminate a home’s interior after dark, the court reasoned, it is unforeseeable that he would leave a 10” taper candle with exposed flame unattended overnight on a bathroom shelf just above where towels and toiletpaper were stored. We conclude that with two days and several unreasonable decisions by the residents separating Penelec’s alleged negligence and the fire, the causal chain between them was too remote as a matter of law to hold Penelec legally responsible for Appellant’s harm. Finding neither error of law nor abuse of discretion in the court’s ruling, therefore, we affirm.

-----------------------------------------------------Want 50 state & federal case law? - click here