Alexander v. City of Big Rapids

• Decision Date: 11 May 1888
• Citation: 38 N.W. 227,70 Mich. 224
• Court: Michigan Supreme Court
• Parties: ALEXANDER v. CITY OF BIG RAPIDS.

38 N.W. 227

70 Mich. 224

ALEXANDER v. CITY OF BIG RAPIDS.

Supreme Court of Michigan

May 11, 1888

Error to circuit court, Mecosta county; C. C. FULLER, Judge.

Action for personal injuries, by Alvin D. Alexander against the city of Big Rapids. The testimony of plaintiff was, in effect that he received the injury after stepping from the sidewalk onto the alleged defective cross-walk, but as to the cause of the injury he was unable to state. The city introduced evidence to show that several feet of the sidewalk had been taken up prior to the accident, so that it did not extend to the cross-walk, and that the accident, therefore, occurred on the sidewalk, instead of on the cross-walk, as alleged. There was no evidence to show how the injury occurred. The city claimed that, the cross-walk having been taken up, and the street graded, several months prior to the accident, it could not be held liable for the injury, under How. St. Mich. � 1445, making it the duty for a city to keep its cross-walks in repair. The court directed a verdict for defendant, and plaintiff brings error.

SHERWOOD C.J.

The plaintiff brings his action for injuries received by him in consequence of the defective condition of a sidewalk in the city of Big Rapids, which he alleges it was the duty of the city to keep in repair, and which it negligently omitted to do. The plaintiff alleges in his declaration that Pine street crosses Rose avenue, in said city, at right angles; that on the north side, and along Pine street, where it crosses the avenue, at the time the injury to plaintiff occurred, there was a public sidewalk or crossing, built by the city, and which it was its duty to maintain and keep in repair, and reasonably safe for pedestrians to pass over that, in grading Rose avenue, the city tore up the cross-walk on Pine street, and excavated the street to the depth of five feet, leaving the sides of the excavation, where the sidewalk on Pine street connects with it, very abrupt and precipitous rendering it dangerous to travelers upon the walk, and in which condition it continued for a long time; that in consequence of the neglect of the city to repair the same and to furnish proper warnings of danger, the plaintiff, while passing along upon the sidewalk in the night-time, without any knowledge of the existence of such danger consequent upon the neglect of the defendant, and without fault on his part, was precipitated down the...