Hakenson v. City of Neillsville

• Decision Date: 11 March 1913
• Citation: 152 Wis. 594,140 N.W. 281
• Parties: HAKENSON v. CITY OF NEILLSVILLE ET AL.
• Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

152 Wis. 594

140 N.W. 281

HAKENSON

v.CITY OF NEILLSVILLE ET AL.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

March 11, 1913.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Clark County; James O'Neill, Judge.

Action by Carrie Hakenson against the City of Neillsville and another. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant named appeals. Affirmed.

This is an action to recover damages for personal injuries received by the plaintiff on Saturday, February 5, 1910, by slipping and falling upon an alleged defective sidewalk on one of the streets of the defendant city. Plaintiff was injured on the sidewalk on the east side of Hewitt street, in front of the “old Taplin foundry.” The street in front of the foundry building had been filled two or three feet, and the filling slanted off under the building to the natural level of the ground. The building rested on posts and was close to the edge of the walk, which was five feet four inches wide and laid on top of the filling. The alleged insufficiency and want of repair of the walk was that the walk was not level in its width, that the outer edge of the walk was ten inches or a foot higher than the inner edge, and that a ridge of snow and ice had accumulated on the outer edge of the walk. About 4 o'clock in the afternoon of the day of the accident, the plaintiff passed over this walk on her way to town. In passing by the place of accident, she went close to the foundry building, on the inner edge of the walk, where, it is admitted, there was a clear path about a foot in width. On her return, about 7 o'clock in the evening, she met some one at this place and stepped toward the outer edge of the walk. The plaintiff testified that it was dark, and that she was expecting her daughter to come to meet her, and that she was looking closely at the passer-by to ascertain whether or not it was her daughter; that she slipped and fell, and sustained a fracture of the bones of the hip. She was confined to her bed for two months, was unable to work for months thereafter; it was necessary for her to use crutches for 15 or 16 months, and she could do but little up to the time of trial. The injury resulted in a permanent shortening of the plaintiff's leg of almost an inch.

There was evidence in behalf of the plaintiff that during the previous summer the walk at the place of accident was not level; that the outer edge was about a foot higher than the inner edge; that this condition existed up to the time of the accident; that the walk was not cleaned of snow and ice during the winter; and that the ridge of ice, variously estimated as from six inches to a foot in thickness, had accumulated at the outer edge of the walk and existed during the winter, and specifically for the previous month. In behalf of the defendant city there was evidence that the walk had been repaired and made level during the preceding October; that on the Monday following the accident the walk was practically clear of snow and ice; that there was no ridge of snow and ice on the outer edge; and that measurements and a photograph, taken on February 12, 1910, showed the walk to be level and that there was no ridge of ice. There was evidence also by a witness for the defendant owner of the foundry property that he had cleaned the walk of snow during the winter. In plaintiff's behalf there was evidence that on the Monday morning following the accident there was fresh sawdust on the walk and about the place of accident, that some blocking under the walk appeared freshly sawed, and that burned matches about the place indicated that the walk had been repaired during the night, and that the snow which had been cleaned from the walk appeared to have been lately removed and thrown off the walk.

The court dismissed the action as to the owner of the foundry property. The jury by a special verdict found that the outer edge of the walk at the time of accident was six inches higher than the inner edge; that a slippery ridge of ice and snow three inches thick had existed on the sidewalk continuously for three weeks preceding the accident; that the sidewalk at the place of injury for three feet from the inner edge was not sufficiently cleared of snow and ice to render it reasonably safe for public travel; that the insufficiency and want of repair of the sidewalk had existed so long that in the exercise of ordinary care the defendant city should have discovered and have repaired it before the injury; that the...