Lawson v. City of Seattle
| Decision Date | 07 April 1893 |
| Citation | 33 P. 347,6 Wash. 184 |
| Parties | LAWSON v. CITY OF SEATTLE. |
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
Appeal from superior court, King county; R. Osborn, Judge.
Action by Mary Lawson against the city of Seattle for the death of her husband, Herman Lawson, who was employed by the city as a fireman. A demurrer to the complaint was sustained, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
Tustin, Gearin & Crews, for appellant.
George Donworth and James B. Howe, for respondent.
We believe there are no authorities which support appellant's contention that a municipal corporation is liable for the negligence of firemen engaged in the line of their duty. The authorities cited by appellant certainly do not maintain this proposition, but on the contrary most of them assert exactly the opposite proposition, viz. the rule that a municipal corporation is not liable for the negligence of firemen engaged in the line of their duty. This is so plainly the well-established rule that it is scarcely necessary to discuss it. See Dill. Mun. Corp. (4th Ed.) § 976, and cases cited. This is all the proposition that is discussed by the appellant, and is probably all the point that could be raised under the pleadings, for while the complaint alleges that the city furnished an unsuitable and defective frame or brace, known as a "dead man," for use in the work in which Lawson was engaged, yet it does not appear very clearly, if at all, that the defective dead man was the cause of the accident. But, conceding that it was so stated in the complaint, it is a well-known fact that the apparatus used by a fire company is not under the control of the city, and such city can therefore no more be held for the defective condition of the apparatus than it can for its negligent operation by the company. We think the demurrer to the complaint was properly sustained, and the judgment is therefore affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jackson v. City of Kansas City
...the captain of the truck. They were not fellow-servants. (1 Beach, Pub.Corp., §§ 741-744; 2 Dillon, Mun.Corp. 977-980; Lawson v. Seattle, 6 Wash. 184, 33 Pac. 347; Peters v. City of Lindsborg, 40 Kan. 654, 20 Pac. 490.)" 60 Kan. at 488, 57 P. 123. (Emphasis See also Restatement (Second) of ......
-
Robert Workman v. Mayor, Aldermen and Commonalty of the City of New York
...St. Paul (1886) 34 Minn. 402, 26 N. W. 228; Gillespie v. Lincoln (1892) 35 Neb. 34, 46, 16 L. R. A. 349, 52 N. W. 811; Lawson v. Seattle (1893) 6 Wash. 184, 33 Pac. 347. The law on this point, as understood and administered throughout the country by the highest courts of all the states in w......
-
Island Transp. Co. v. City of Seattle
... ... Shaw, 14 Wall. 116, 20 L.Ed. 787; Workman v. City of ... New York, 179 U.S. 552, 21 Sup.Ct. 212, 45 L.Ed. 314, ... reversed 67 F. 347, 14 C.C.A. 530 ... The ... respondent cites the following authorities: Chlopeck Fish ... Co. v. Seattle, 64 Wash. 315, 117 P. 232; Lawson v ... Seattle, 6 Wash. 184, 33 P. 347; Wilcox v ... Chicago, 107 Ill. 334, 47 Am.Rep. 434; Greenwood v ... Louisville, 13 Bush (Ky.) 226, 26 Am.Rep. 263; ... Alexander v. Vicksburg, 68 Miss. 564, 10 So. 62; ... Grube v. St. Paul, 34 Minn. 402, 26 N.W. 228; ... Drew v. The Chesapeake, 2 ... ...
-
Howard v. Tacoma School Dist. No. 10, Pierce County
... ... Henry ... W. Pennock, of Seattle, amicus curiae ... Kelly & ... MacMahon, of Tacoma, for respondent ... The facts are as follows: ... In the basement of the Oakland school building, in the city ... of Tacoma, the defendant installed and maintained two ladders ... for the use of ... thus according to the municipality the sovereign immunity of ... the state. Lawson v. Seattle, 6 Wash. 184, 33 P ... 347; Russell v. Tacoma, 8 Wash. 156, 35 P. 605, 40 ... ...