Roberts v. Village of St. James

• Decision Date: 09 June 1899
• Docket Number: Nos. 11,528 - (127).,s. 11,528 - (127).
• Parties: C. IDA ROBERTS v. VILLAGE OF ST. JAMES.
• Court: Minnesota Supreme Court

76 Minn. 456

C. IDA ROBERTS v. VILLAGE OF ST. JAMES.

Nos. 11,528 - (127).

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

June 9, 1899.

Action in the district court for Watonwan county to recover $15,000 damages for personal injuries. The case was tried before

Quinn, J., and a jury, which rendered a verdict in favor of plaintiff for $581.25. From an order denying a motion for a new trial defendant appealed. Affirmed.

W. S. Hammond and Lorin Cray, for appellant.

A. R. Pfau, Seager & Lobben and Ashley Coffman, for respondent.

START, C. J.¹

Action for the recovery of damages sustained by the plaintiff by reason of a defective sidewalk. Verdict for the plaintiff, and the defendant appealed from an order denying its motion for a new trial.

The defendant's sole contention here is that the plaintiff did not give notice of her injury and present her claim for compensation to the village council, as required by Laws 1897, c. 248. Within 30 days after her injury, the plaintiff signed and verified a written notice of her injury and claim for compensation therefor, which was directed to the village council, and in form and substance complied with the statute. Her attorney acting for her, and while the village council were in actual session, handed to and left with each member thereof and with the recorder of the village a copy of such notice. Thereupon the council resolved to refer the same to the attorney of the village. On the next day the plaintiff's attorney handed to and left with the president of the council the original notice, who sent it to the recorder, who filed it in his office. All this was done within the time limited by the statute.

How the notice of injury must be given and claim for compensation presented to the council or other governing body of the municipality the statute does not direct. It must be done in some practical and effective way, and in determining the sufficiency of the method adopted in any particular case technical strictness will not be required; a substantial compliance with the statute is all that is necessary. In the cases of Doyle v. City of Duluth, 74 Minn. 157, 76 N. W. 1029, and Lyons v. City of Red Wing, supra, page 20, we indicated some of the orderly methods for giving the notice of the injury and presenting the claim for compensation to the council. The method suggested for serving the notice when the council was not in session was to direct the notice to the council, and leave it with the clerk or other officer who had charge...