Schultz v. City of Milwaukee

Decision Date20 April 1880
Citation5 N.W. 342,49 Wis. 254
PartiesSCHULTZ, by guardian, v. THE CITY OF MILWAUKEE
CourtWisconsin Supreme Court

Argued April 3, 1880

APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Milwaukee County.

Action to recover damages for injuries received by the plaintiff while passing along one of the public streets of the defendant city. After alleging that the city is a corporation, having authority to keep the public streets therein in repair, to remove nuisances therefrom, and to prevent any improper use thereof, and that Poplar, Seventh and Eighth streets, in said city, are highways dedicated to and used by the public as such, the complaint proceeds as follows:

"And this plaintiff further shows that, on or about the fifth day of January, 1879, and on other days and at other times prior thereto, the defendant knowingly, negligently and carelessly permitted and allowed and sanctioned certain disorderly fellows, and idle persons and boys and youths, to encumber and obstruct said Poplar street, and Seventh and Eighth streets aforesaid where they cross and intersect said street by practicing and indulging in certain sports, plays and amusements, usually called bobbing or sliding down hill; that said sports, plays, diversions and amusements consisted in a large number of boys and youths, and young persons lacking discretion, assembling and congregating together upon said Poplar street, and connecting together two or more small sleds by a long board and boards, and great numbers of boys and youths getting thereon, and sitting thereon, and letting said structure run furiously and rapidly down the steep hill which is in Poplar street, the summit of which hill is about between Ninth and Tenth streets in said city, and the foot of which hill was and is about between Fifth and Sixth streets of said city, all of which aforesaid streets are public streets and public highways.

"And this plaintiff further shows, that said boys and youths, and other persons, used said Poplar street as aforesaid for the purpose aforesaid, and obstructed the said street by such use thereof, many days prior to the fifth day of January, A. D 1879, and many times in the day, and so obstructed said street, and the streets and highways crossing and intersecting therewith, above named, as to hinder and prevent ordinary travel and passage over and upon the same; and such use of said Poplar street, in the manner aforesaid, became and was a public nuisance, to the knowledge of the defendant its officers, servants, agents and employees; and the defendant negligently and carelessly allowed and permitted said unlawful use and obstruction of said streets to remain and continue from day to day, and many times in the same day prior to and at the time last aforesaid; and such use of said street and streets was calculated to and did obstruct and encumber the same, and to endanger and did endanger the lives and property of persons traveling upon the same.

"That, prior to the time named aforesaid, the said defendant, its servants, agents and officers, did license boys and girls to slide down hill in said city; and that, under such license and permission, the young men, boys and youths in the city of Milwaukee did use the streets of said city, and particularly Poplar street in said city, to slide down hill with sleds and other structures used by them to slide down hill; and the plaintiff avers that the defendant well knew the dangerous character of such parties to slide down hill, and that the lives and persons of people would be jeopardized thereby.

"And this plaintiff further shows that, on or about the said fifth day of January, 1879, the streets aforesaid of the city of Milwaukee, and particularly Poplar street in said city, was covered with ice and snow, and was very smooth and slippery; that there is a hill on Poplar street extending from about the vicinity of Sixth street to about Tenth street in said city, and the ascent from Sixth street to Tenth street is very steep and abrupt, and the descent from Tenth street downward is at a very rapid decline; that on the day aforesaid a large number of young men and boys had been and were engaged in sliding down the hill on said street from Tenth street downwards, on sleds, hand-sleds, bobs and bob-sleds, and other structures for sport, amusement and diversion, to the knowledge and with the license of the defendant."

It is further alleged that on the day aforesaid, as the plaintiff was lawfully crossing Poplar street, in the vicinity of Seventh street, with due care, he was run against by one of the structures above described, running down Poplar street with great and uncontrollable speed, carrying about thirty boys and youths seated thereon, and received the injuries complained of.

Defendant demurred to the complaint as not stating a cause of action against the city; and appealed from an order overruling the demurrer.

Order reversed and cause remanded.

D. H. Johnson, City Attorney, for the appellant, argued, 1. That a municipal corporation is not liable for any failure, mistake or even wrong committed by its legislative department. Dillon on M. C., § 39, and cases cited in the notes. 2. That such a corporation is not liable for any failure on the part of its police department. Dillon, § 773, and notes. 3. That coasting or bobbing in a highway is not an obstruction or defect in the highway, for which a city or town is liable under the statute. Ray v. Manchester, 46 N. H., 59; Hutchinson v. Concord, 41 Vt., 271. 4. That even if this were otherwise, plaintiff could not recover in this action, because he had not exhausted his remedy against the persons by whose wrongful act the obstruction was caused (Laws of 1874, ch. 184, subch. XX, sec. 1), and because no notice of the damage, etc., had been given as required by sec. 1339, R. S.

For the respondent, there was a brief by Austin & Runkel, and oral argument by Mr. Austin:

1. In the absence of any express statute, municipal corporations having the powers ordinarily conferred upon them respecting streets and sidewalks within their limits, owe the public a duty to keep them in a safe condition for use in the usual modes of travel, and are liable in a civil action for special injuries resulting from neglect of this duty. Allbrittin v....

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT