Epstein v. City of New Haven
| Decision Date | 04 March 1926 |
| Citation | 104 Conn. 283,132 A. 467 |
| Court | Connecticut Supreme Court |
| Parties | EPSTEIN v. CITY OF NEW HAVEN. |
Appeal from Superior Court, New Haven County; Isaac Wolfe and Earnest C. Simpson, Judges.
Action by Samuel C. Epstein, administrator of a deceased minor against the City of New Haven to recover for deceased's death, alleged to have been caused by defendant's negligence. From a judgment for the defendant, after a demurrer to the complaint was sustained, plaintiff appeals. No error.
Harold H. Kaufman, of New Haven, for appellant.
Frank S. Bergin, of New Haven, for appellee.
The complaint in this action seeks to recover from the city of New Haven damages for the death of the plaintiff's intestate by reason of the breaking of an amusement device in a park maintained and operated by the city. The decedent was a boy about 13 years of age and suffered his injury from the breaking of the support of a swing upon which he and other boys were playing.
The complaint alleges that his injury and consequent death were due to the negligence of the defendant in various respects specified, and that he was himself at all times in the exercise of due care. The action is therefore one founded upon negligence and recovery upon any other ground was not permissible. Hayes v. New York, N.H. & H. R. Co., 99 A. 699, 91 Conn. 301, 304. It is well settled in this state that municipal corporations are exempt from liability for the negligent performance of a purely governmental duty unless made liable by statute. Pope v. New Haven, 99 A. 51 91 Conn. 79, 80, L.R.A. 1917B, 1239.
The control of public parks belongs primarily to the state, and municipalities in operating and managing them act as governmental agencies exercising an authority delegated to them by the state. Hartford v. Maslen, 57 A. 740, 76 Conn. 599, 611; Conners v. New Haven, 125 A. 375 101 Conn. 191, 194. The adaptation of public parks to serve in whole or part as places of recreation for those who frequent them is a natural incident to their public use " in the common understanding, a park, in this country is a place of ground in or near a city or town for ornament and as a place * * * for recreation and amusement, and it is usually laid out in walks, drives and recreation grounds." South Park Commissioners v. Montgomery Ward & Co., 93 N.E. 910, 912, 248 Ill. 299, 304 (21 Ann.Cas. 127). And one might cite the early dedication to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Considine v. City of Waterbury
...function because it is part of duty imposed by state on municipality to maintain highways within its limits); Epstein v. New Haven, 104 Conn. 283, 284, 132 A. 467 (1926) (use of municipal property as public park is governmental function because "control of public parks belongs primarily to ......
-
Blonski v. Metro. Dist. Comm'n
...a governmental function, not a proprietary function. See Hannon v. Waterbury, 106 Conn. 13, 16, 136 A. 876 (1927); Epstein v. New Haven, 104 Conn. 283, 284, 132 A. 467 (1926). The defendant contends in its brief that, under Martel and Elliott, as a matter of law, “allegations of negligence ......
-
Town of Winchester v. Cox
...of Hartford v. Maslen, 76 Conn. 599, 611, 57 A. 740; Conners v. City of New Haven, 101 Conn. 191, 194, 125 A. 375; Epstein v. City of New Haven, 104 Conn. 283, 284, 132 A. 467; Hannon v. City of Waterbury, supra, 106 Conn, page 17, 136 A. 876, 57 A.L.R. 402. Hence it follows that it is ordi......
-
Leydon v. Greenwich
...Conn. 191, 194, 125 A. 375 (1924) (land held by municipality as public park inures to benefit of general public); Epstein v. New Haven, 104 Conn. 283, 284, 132 A. 467 (1926) (control of public parks belongs to state and municipalities managing them act as agencies exercising authority deleg......