Beaver v. City of Eagle Grove

• Decision Date: 12 April 1902
• Citation: 89 N.W. 1100,116 Iowa 485
• Parties: MARTHA J. BEAVER, Appellee, v. CITY OF EAGLE GROVE, Appellant
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

89 N.W. 1100

116 Iowa 485

MARTHA J. BEAVER, Appellee, v. CITY OF EAGLE GROVE, Appellant

Supreme Court of Iowa, Des Moines

April 12, 1902

Appeal from Wright District Court.--HON. B. P. BIRDSALL, Judge.

ACTION to recover damages for personal injuries occasioned by a defective walk. Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff, from which the defendant appeals.

Affirmed.

Eugene Bryan and C. M. Nagle for appellants.

A. R Ladd, Sylvester Flynn and T. D. Healy for appellee.

SHERWIN J. WEAVER, J., took no part.

OPINION

SHERWIN, J.

While passing over one of the defendant's walks, the plaintiff stepped on a loose board, which tripped and threw her. There was evidence tending to show that the general condition of the walk for some distance along there was bad, and had been for some time before the accident to the plaintiff. In the seventh paragraph of its charge the court told the jury that the city would not be liable for the plaintiff's injury unless it was found that the defect in the walk, if any, had existed for such length of time as that the city should have had notice of it, if it had exercised reasonable care and watchfulness over the walk. The converse of this proposition was also stated in the same paragraph. In the ninth paragraph of the charge the jury was told that if the walk had been inspected by the defendant's officer immediately before the accident, with reasonable care, and no defects were found, the city would not be liable. This instruction, appellant concedes, is correct; but in the next paragraph the court said that if the defect complained of actually existed at the time of the inspection, and was such that it ought to have been discovered by the exercise of ordinary care, the city would not be liable. Both the seventh and ninth paragraphs of the charge state the law correctly, as applied to the facts in the case. It is true, there is no direct evidence as to the previous condition of the particular board over which the plaintiff tripped; but there is abundant evidence tending to show the dilapidated general condition of the entire walk along there, and this was competent on the question of notice to the city of its condition at the point in controversy. Smith v. City of Des Moines, 84 Iowa 685, 51 N.W. 77; Armstrong v. Town of Ackley, 71 Iowa 76; Wilberding v. City of Dubuque, 111 Iowa 484, 82 N.W. 957. The cases relied on by the appellant are cases where single defects in the walk were charged, and are not within the rule governing this class of cases. Cook v. City of Anamosa, 66 Iowa 427, 23 N.W. 907; Ruggles v. Town of Nevada, 63 Iowa 185, 18 N.W. 866.

The plaintiff's evidence conclusively showed a permanent injury, and of such a...