Ryall v. City of Maplewood

• Decision Date: 05 March 1918
• Docket Number: No. 14989.,14989.
• Citation: 201 S.W. 633
• Parties: RYALL v. CITY OF MAPLEWOOD.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

201 S.W. 633

RYALL v. CITY OF MAPLEWOOD.

No. 14989.

St. Louis Court of Appeals. Missouri.

March 5, 1918.

Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court ; Gustavus A. Wurdeman, Judge.

"Not to be officially published."

Action by Nettie Ryall against the City of Maplewood. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.

M. F. O'Brien and Wilfred Jones, both of Maplewood, for appellant. Francis M. Curlee, Richard Anderson, and Connett & Ourrie, all of St. Louis, for respondent.

ALLEN, J.

This is an action to recover damages for personal injuries resulting to plaintiff from a fall sustained by her while undertaking to pass over a street crossing in the defendant city, alleged to have been occasioned by a dangerous defect existing in such crossing. The trial before the court and a jury resulted in a verdict and judgment for plaintiff in the sum of $700, and the case is here on defendant's appeal.

The evidence discloses that on the evening of July 27, 1913, plaintiff, a married woman, was undertaking to pass over a street crossing in the defendant city, which extended across Maple boulevard at or near its junction with Marshall avenue, public streets in said city, and that in stepping upon one of the stepping-stones comprising this crossing plaintiff slipped and fell, sustaining injuries. This crossing consisted of a number of limestone rocks, of various sizes, placed in a somewhat irregular line as steppingstones. Maple avenue is referred to as a macadam street, but the evidence is that there is much clay on both sides of these stepping-stones, and it also appears that upon the surface of the street many other rocks, of various sizes and shapes, were lying thereabout. It appears that for lack of drainage facilities the surface water derived from rainfall flowed through the street at this place, the water flowing between and, it is said, sometimes over, the rocks forming this crossing. Photographs of the crossing and its immediate surroundings were in evidence before the jury, and repeated reference is made to them in the testimony. According to testimony for plaintiff this crossing was originally constructed by an improvement association, a voluntary association of residents in that community, but it fully appears that the city had maintained it, on its public street, for years prior to the time of plaintiff's injury.

On said July 27, 1913, a rain had fallen some time during the afternoon. Plaintiff and her husband lived on a street in that vicinity and on the evening in question at about 7 o'clock they passed over this crossing in going to visit some friends. They returned about 9 o'clock, it being then dark, and while plaintiff was attempting to pass over this crossing according to her testimony, she stepped upon a stone, identified in some of the photographs in evidence, which slanted or sloped to one side, causing her to slip and fall, resulting in the injuries for which she seeks to recover.

Plaintiff's testimony is that at the time of her injury the earth or clay about this crossing was quite muddy, though no water was then flowing in the street ; that, though it was dark, she could see the white surface of the stones, but could not discern that this particular stone in question had the slant or inclination which, it is said, caused her fall. She testified that she later examined the stone, and that its surface was smooth, but had little "ripples" or "waves." Her testimony as to the angle at which the stone was inclined is quite meager and indefinite. She identified the stone in one of the photographs, saying:

"Well, it was slanting, even more than it shows on that picture ; it slants over more than it shows there."

It does not appear whether this slant was due to the nature of the rock...