Huntington v. City of Calais

• Decision Date: 18 February 1909
• Citation: 105 Me. 144,73 A. 829
• Parties: HUNTINGTON v. CITY OF CALAIS.
• Court: Maine Supreme Court

73 A. 829

105 Me. 144

HUNTINGTON

v. CITY OF CALAIS.

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine.

Feb. 18, 1909.

(Official.)

Exceptions from Supreme Judicial Court, Washington County.

Action by Melvina Huntington against the City of Calais. Verdict for plaintiff, and defendant excepts. Exceptions sustained.

Special action on the case under Rev. St. c. 23, § 76, to recover damages for a personal injury alleged to have been received by the plaintiff through a defect in a public street which the defendant city was bound by law to maintain and keep in repair. It is assumed that the plea was the general issue, and that the verdict was for the plaintiff, although the record is silent on both points. The defendant city excepted to certain rulings of the presiding justice.

The case is stated in the opinion.

Argued before WHITEHOUSE, SAVAGE, SPEAR, KING, and BIRD, JJ.

R. J. McGarrigle, for plaintiff.

H. J. Dudley, City Sol., for defendant.

WHITEHOUSE, J. This is an action on the case to recover damages for a personal injury alleged to have been received by the plaintiff through a defect in a public street which the defendant city was bound by law to maintain and keep in repair. The action is based on section 76 of chapter 23 of the Revised Statutes, which provides that a per son seeking to recover damages for an injury thus sustained "shall within fourteen days thereafter, notify one of the municipal officers of the town, by letter or otherwise, in writing, setting forth his claim for damages and specifying the nature of his injuries and the nature and location of the defect which caused such injury."

At the trial the plaintiff attempted to prove a compliance with this requirement of the statute by offering evidence that such "14 days' notice" had been given to the city clerk. This evidence was admitted by the court subject to objection, and thereupon the defendant's counsel requested an instruction that notice to the city clerk was not a compliance with the statute. The presiding justice declined to give this instruction and for the purposes of the trial ruled that notice to the city clerk was sufficient. The case comes to this court on exceptions to this ruling.

The liability of cities and towns for damages sustained by travelers by reason of defects in highways is created solely by the Legislature, and all of the conditions and limitations upon which the remedy is granted must be strictly observed as prescribed by the statute. The duty imposed upon the...