Bradford v. City of Anniston

• Decision Date: 18 December 1890
• Citation: 92 Ala. 349,8 So. 683
• Parties: BRADFORD v. MAYOR, ETC., OF ANNISTON.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

8 So. 683

92 Ala. 349

BRADFORD v. MAYOR, ETC., OF ANNISTON.

Supreme Court of Alabama

December 18, 1890

Appeal from city court of Anniston; B. F. CASSADY, Judge.

This was an action brought by the appellant against the appellee a municipal corporation, and sought to recover damages for an injury to his ox, which resulted in the death of the ox, and which injury was caused by a defect in a street of the city. The case was submitted to the court for decision, without the intervention of a jury. The only exception to the ruling of the lower court on the evidence was taken to the court's admitting in evidence the testimony of one Spencer, who testified that he was a civil engineer. His testimony tended to show that the bridge, as repaired by the street force, was properly constructed. The plaintiff appeals from the judgment of the court, which was rendered in favor of the defendant and assigns that judgment and the ruling on the evidence as error.

T C. & S. S. Sensabaugh and Jas. H. Savage, for appellant.

Agee & Micou, for appellee.

COLEMAN J.

In the location and erection of bridges regard should be had to the size and nature of the stream', the character and feature of the adjacent grounds, the relative position and formation of the abutting land, its liability to overflow, and their probable extent and duration. Railway Co. v Bridges, 86 Ala. 451, 5 South. Rep. 864. This is the rule laid down as applicable to railroads, and the same rule is applicable to cities, so far as it requires of them in the construction of bridges across their streets to provide against such casualties as a cautious and prudent man should foresee and anticipate. The evidence shows that the branch ran diagonally across the street, from a north-eastern in a south-western direction. The bank on the eastern and northern sides was high, and not subject to overflow, while the western and southern bank of the stream was low, and subject to overflow. The low side was raised by filling in with earth. The sleepers of the bridge rested on the high embankment on the eastern side, and on top of posts placed upright in the channel on the western and lower side, and then ran out on the raised embankment, which constituted the abutment to the bridge. During an overflow the current necessarily came with great force against the earth forming the embankment on the lower side, and, unless in some way protected, it could not be said that the abutment was constructed with reasonable skill and prudence. After the injury had occurred, it was shown that, by the use of boxing and other appliances, the embankment and abutment on the lower side made by earth was properly protected...