Estelle v. Vill. of Lank Crystal

• Decision Date: 07 October 1880
• Citation: 27 Minn. 243,6 N.W. 775
• Parties: ESTELLE v THE VILLAGE OF LAKE CRYSTAL.
• Court: Minnesota Supreme Court

27 Minn. 243

6 N.W. 775

ESTELLEvTHE VILLAGE OF LAKE CRYSTAL.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

Filed October 7, 1880.

Appeal from order of district court, Blue Earth county.

Brown & Wiswell, for respondent.

Louis Cray, for appellant.

GILFILLAN, C.J.

The defendant is an incorporated village, possessing the powers in respect to streets and sidewalks usually vested in municipal corporations. Humphrey street, one of the principal streets of the village, runs east and west, and is 60 feet wide. At one place, for a considerable distance, there is a depression of several feet in the original surface of the ground over which the street runs. Through this depression and along the south side of the street the village authorities had, by filling in, raised the surface and constructed a wagon road 20 or 25 feet in made width, and on the same side had a sidewalk. Along this made road and sidewalk the travel at that part of the street mostly passed. Nothing had been done by the authorities to improve the north half of the street through this depression. In this depression on the north side of the street a Mr. Humphrey, in the spring of 1878, erected a store; the front, 20 feet wide, being on the line of the street. The first floor above the basement was five or six feet higher than the natural surface of the ground at that place. Along this front, and for four or five feet beyond it on the east, and nearly at the height of the first floor, he constructed a platform about five feet wide, supported by posts. From the projection of the platform beyond the front of the store on the east there were steps descending north, on the east side of the store, for the purpose of passing from the platform to the basement. No means were provided for getting on or off at the ends of the platform, nor to prevent persons walking or falling off at the ends.

For access to the platform from the street he filled the street in front out to the wagon road made by the authorities. It does not appear that the platform was used by any persons except those about the store or basement, or persons dealing or visiting there. It could not be used for the purpose of passing along the side of the street. It was an effectual barrier to such passage on that side. The platform was on the street sufficiently long before the injury complained of to charge the village with notice of it.

In the fall of 1878, in the evening, plaintiff was at the store on business, and upon coming out walked or...