Holland v. Niemi, No. 35011
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Washington |
| Writing for the Court | OTT; WEAVER |
| Citation | 345 P.2d 1106,55 Wn.2d 85 |
| Parties | Arvin HOLLAND, Individually, and as guardian ad litem for Bradley Holland, a minor, Appellant, v. John S. NIEMI and Cleta Niemi, husband and wife, Respondents. |
| Docket Number | No. 35011 |
| Decision Date | 12 November 1959 |
Page 85
Bradley Holland, a minor, Appellant,
v.
John S. NIEMI and Cleta Niemi, husband and wife, Respondents.
Page 86
[345 P.2d 1107] Jack L. Burtch, Aberdeen, for appellants.
J. K. Hallam, Aberdeen, for respondents.
OTT, Judge.
The trial court sustained a demurrer to the amended complaint and entered judgment of dismissal, with prejudice, upon the ground that the amended complaint did not state a cause of action. Plaintiff appeals. The amended complaint reads as follows:
'Comes now the plaintiff, and for a cause of action against the above-named defendants, complains and alleges:
'(1) That the plaintiff is the duly appointed, qualified and acting Guardian Ad Litem of Bradley Holland, a minor.
'(2) That at all times material herein, the defendants were and now are husband and wife, constituting a marital community under the laws of this state, and residents of Grays Harbor County, State of Washington.
'(3) That plaintiff believes, and therefore alleges that at all times material herein the defendants were the owners of the premises located at 512 First Avenue in Aberdeen, Washington, and plaintiff alleges that at all times material herein said defendants had exclusive possession and control of said premises.
'(4) That on or about the 16th day of July, 1957 the defendants had a large skiff on their said premises, which the defendants had situated so that it was leaning against a concrete wall, resting upon one side, and with the bottom of the boat extending outwardly from the wall. That said boat was leaning in almost an upright position and was very unstable and very likely to topple over without much force. That the side of the boat which was touching
Page 87
the ground was rounded so that very little of the boat actually was touching the ground, thus making its position even more precarious. That said boat was readily visible and apparent from a public alley adjoining said premises, and was in a location which was readily accessible by small children. That small children habitually played in the area where the boat was located, to the knowledge of the defendants. That said boat was attractive to small children as a plaything, and by reason of the precarious position in which it had been situated by the defendants, was extremely dangerous to children. That the defendants knew, or in the exercise of reasonable care should have known the dangerous condition which was created by the position of the boat in respect to children playing in the neighborhood and in that area.'(5) That on the 16th day of July, 1957 Bradley Holland was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ochampaugh v. City of Seattle, No. 45492
...(1940), and since restated in Mathis v. Swanson, 68 Wash.2d 424, 413 P.2d 662 (1966), Holland v. Niemi, [588 P.2d 1354] 55 Wash.2d 85, 345 P.2d 1106 (1959), and McDermott v. Kaczmarek, 2 Wash.App. 643, 469 P.2d 191 (1) The instrumentality or condition must be dangerous in itself, that is, m......
-
Haddad v. First Nat. Stores, Inc., No. 1254-A
...291; Brittain v. Cubbon, 190 Kan. 641, 378 P.2d 141; Walker v. Sprinkle, 267 N.C. 626, 148 S.E.2d 631; Holland v. Niemi, 55 Wash.2d 85, 345 P.2d 1106. We believe, however, that liability under the rule should not be predicated upon the inherent danger of the condition or object. Such an inf......
-
Schneider v. City of Seattle, No. 6729-I
...obstructing any reasonable purpose or use for which it was intended. See Ochampaugh v. Seattle, supra; Holland v. Niemi, 55 Wash.2d 85, 345 P.2d 1106 (1959); Schock v. Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Combined Shows, 5 Wash.2d 599, 105 P.2d 838 (1940). See also Restatement (Second) of Tor......
-
McDermott v. Kaczmarek, No. 235--41064--I
...was no evidence upon which the trier of fact could find that element No. 1 was established. Accord, Holland v. Niemi, 55 Wash.2d 85, 345 P.2d 1106 (1959); Mail v. M. R. Smith Lumber [469 P.2d 198] & Shingle Co., 47 Wash.2d 447, 287 P.2d 877 (1955). Page 654 In one of life's earliest lessons......
-
Ochampaugh v. City of Seattle, No. 45492
...(1940), and since restated in Mathis v. Swanson, 68 Wash.2d 424, 413 P.2d 662 (1966), Holland v. Niemi, [588 P.2d 1354] 55 Wash.2d 85, 345 P.2d 1106 (1959), and McDermott v. Kaczmarek, 2 Wash.App. 643, 469 P.2d 191 (1) The instrumentality or condition must be dangerous in itself, that is, m......
-
Haddad v. First Nat. Stores, Inc., No. 1254-A
...291; Brittain v. Cubbon, 190 Kan. 641, 378 P.2d 141; Walker v. Sprinkle, 267 N.C. 626, 148 S.E.2d 631; Holland v. Niemi, 55 Wash.2d 85, 345 P.2d 1106. We believe, however, that liability under the rule should not be predicated upon the inherent danger of the condition or object. Such an inf......
-
Schneider v. City of Seattle, No. 6729-I
...obstructing any reasonable purpose or use for which it was intended. See Ochampaugh v. Seattle, supra; Holland v. Niemi, 55 Wash.2d 85, 345 P.2d 1106 (1959); Schock v. Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Combined Shows, 5 Wash.2d 599, 105 P.2d 838 (1940). See also Restatement (Second) of Tor......
-
McDermott v. Kaczmarek, No. 235--41064--I
...was no evidence upon which the trier of fact could find that element No. 1 was established. Accord, Holland v. Niemi, 55 Wash.2d 85, 345 P.2d 1106 (1959); Mail v. M. R. Smith Lumber [469 P.2d 198] & Shingle Co., 47 Wash.2d 447, 287 P.2d 877 (1955). Page 654 In one of life's earliest lessons......