Drible v. Village Improvement Co.

• Decision Date: 12 May 1937
• Citation: 123 Conn. 20,192 A. 308
• Court: Connecticut Supreme Court
• Parties: DRIBLE v. VILLAGE IMPROVEMENT CO.

192 A. 308

123 Conn. 20

DRIBLE v. VILLAGE IMPROVEMENT CO.

Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut.

May 12, 1937

Appeal from Supreme Court, Fairfield County; Edward J. Quinlan Judge.

Action by Eleanor F. Drible against the Village Improvement Company for damages for personal injuries allegedly caused by negligence of the defendant. From a decision setting aside a verdict for the plaintiff, the plaintiff appeals.

No error.

In action against property owner for injuries sustained in fall on steps of common approach and allegedly caused by ice on steps, evidence as to notice to property owner of condition of steps so as to impose liability on it, held insufficient for jury, where injuries were sustained in morning after evening in which snow fell, and there was no showing of any ice on steps prior to time of snowfall.

Edmond L. Morrison, of New Canaan, and Frank L. Wilder, of Bridgeport, for appellant.

Raymond E. Baldwin, of Bridgeport, for appellee.

Argued before MALTBIE, C.J., and HINMAN, BANKS, AVERY, and BROWN JJ.

AVERY, Judge.

The plaintiff brought this action to recover damages for injuries asserted to have been sustained by reason of a fall while descending a flight of steps in front of the post office at New Canaan. She alleged that on January 14, 1935, at about 9:30 a. m., while descending the steps, she slipped upon ice thereon and fell, and was injured; and claimed that the steps were in an unsafe and slippery condition by reason of the accumulation of ice thereon and that her injuries were due to the negligence of the defendant in failing to maintain the premises in a reasonably safe condition. The case was tried to the jury and a verdict rendered in favor of the plaintiff which the court, upon motion, set aside, and the plaintiff has appealed. The only assignment of error involved in this appeal is the propriety of the court's action in setting aside the verdict.

Taking the view of the evidence most favorable to the plaintiff, the jury might reasonably have found the facts as follows: The defendant owned a building in the business center of New Canaan. The central part of the building was used as a United States post office, and on each side were stores occupied by tenants. The building sets back from the street. The open space between it and the street line was raised above the street which, at this location, ascended a slight grade. Two separate sets of concrete steps under the control of the landlord led from the street line to the space in front of the building; one set was in front of the part occupied as a post office and the other led to the space in front of one of the stores. At about 9:30 a. m. of January 14, 1935, the plaintiff went to the post office from her home located about a block and a half away. The plaintiff approached the post office by the set of steps located in front of the store and crossed the space to the post office. She was returning by the same route when she fell on the steps. She claimed that she was caused to fall by reason of ice thereon. On the evening of January 13th, the day before the plaintiff fell, snow had begun to fall at about 5 p. m. and continued to fall until 8 o'clock, when there was an inch and a half of snow on the ground. From 6 o'clock in the evening of January 13th until 6 o'clock in the evening of January 14th, the minimum temperature was 20° and the maximum 30° > > . From 6 p. m. on January 12th to 6 p. m. on January 13th, the maximum temperature was 27° and the minimum 13° . From 6 p. m. on January 11th to 6 p. m. on January 12th, the maximum temperature was 32° and the minimum 21° . Except for the fall of snow on the night of January 13th, there had been no previous fall since the first of January, when one inch of snow fell, but there had been several rainstorms.

The steps were swept off by the janitor at 7 a. m. on the morning of the accident. He did not remember having seen any ice upon them at that time, nor was there any evidence by any witness as to the presence of ice upon the steps previous to the time when the plaintiff fell. She stated that on going up the steps to the post office she did not observe any ice upon the steps. After she had...