Chartiers V. Gas Co. v. Lynch

Unknown CourtJanuary 3, 1888Cited 3 times

Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s): Clark, Gordon, Green, Paxson, Sterrett, Trunkey, Williams
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling: Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached: appeal
State: Pennsylvania

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Outcome

The Commonwealth Court affirmed the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review's decision granting benefits to teachers, holding that the work stoppage was a lockout rather than a strike because the school district unilaterally changed health insurance coverage and failed to actually restore the status quo.

Excerpt

ERROR TO THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS NO. 1 OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY. No. 246 October Term 1886, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 608 September Term 1886, C. P. In the court below an action in case for negligence was instituted by Ann Lynch against the Chartiers Valley Gas Company and the Philadelphia company, to recover damages for injuries received from an explosion of natural gas. At the trial on May 11, 1887, the facts appeared: The Chartiers Valley Gas Company, a corporation organized under the act of May 29, 1885, P. L. 29, on May 4, 1886, entered into a written contract with Martin Joyce to lay down between certain points a twenty inch cast-iron pipe upon certain streets in Pittsburgh; inter alia, upon Penn Street, passing by the Hotel Anderson. The contract bound the said Joyce to lay the pipe, etc., refill the ditch, pave the same, and clean up streets, “all in accordance with the specifications which accompany and are a part of this agreement,” and to give bond in $10,000, with approved sureties, for the faithful performance of his contract. A provision of the specifications was as follows : “ All the work is to conform to the requirements of the city ordinance, regulating the laying of natural gas pipes, and to be done in a manner satisfactory to the city engineer and to the superintendent of the first party. The work shall not be considered finished, or any money due thereon, until fully approved and certified to by said superintendent.” There were provisions in the natural gas ordinance referred to, that no more than two sqriares of a street should be open at once ; that the city should in no event be liable for injury or damage to property by reason of assuming control and direction of the work; nor for any loss or damage sustained by any person by reason of the laying or using of such pipes, but the same should be paid by the gas company who should indemnify the city from all loss and costs therefrom; that the work should be discontinued at

What This Ruling Means

# Chartiers V. Gas Co. v. Lynch - Plain English Summary **What Happened** Teachers at Norwin School District stopped working when the district locked them out (prevented them from working) rather than the teachers choosing to strike on their own. The teachers then applied for unemployment benefits, but this was initially denied. **What the Court Decided** The court ruled in favor of the teachers, affirming that the work stoppage was a lockout by the school district, not a strike initiated by the workers. Because the employer caused the work stoppage, the teachers qualified for unemployment compensation benefits. **Why This Matters for Workers** This case establishes an important distinction: when employers lock workers out, those workers can receive unemployment benefits. A lockout means the employer is responsible for the job loss, not the workers. This protects employees financially during disputes they didn't start. The ruling ensures workers aren't punished with lost benefits when their employer is the one who stops the work relationship.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Read Full Opinion More Norwin School District Rulings All Rulings

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

Check My Rights Learn the Basics

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.