Smith v. City of Cloquet
| Decision Date | 20 December 1912 |
| Docket Number | 17,721 - (62) |
| Citation | 139 N.W. 141,120 Minn. 50 |
| Parties | CHARLOTTE R. SMITH v. CITY OF CLOQUET |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
Action in the district court for Carlton county to recover $1,065 for personal injuries. The complaint, among other matters alleged that plaintiff, on the day mentioned, was "lawfully walking along said sidewalk * * * in a careful manner," when, owing to its slippery and uneven condition, she fell and was hurt. The answer was a general denial. The case was tried before Dibell, J., and a jury which returned a verdict in favor of plaintiff for $225. Defendant's motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or for a new trial was denied. From the judgment entered pursuant to the verdict, defendant appealed. Affirmed.
Liability for ice and snow on sidewalks.
Though mere slipperiness from the accumulation of ice and snow upon the streets and sidewalks of a municipality does not create a liability for injuries received in consequence of that condition, there may be a liability where the municipality negligently permits an accumulation of ice and snow to such an extent and for such a time that slippery and dangerous ridges, irregularities, and depressions are formed therein from travel thereon, or other causes, thus rendering the street or walk unsafe and dangerous for public use.
Verdict sustained by evidence.
Evidence held sufficient to support a verdict of liability within the rule stated.
J. A Fesenbeck, for appellant.
Walter L. Case, for respondent.
Action for personal injuries alleged to have resulted from the negligence of defendant. Plaintiff had a verdict, and defendant appealed from an order denying its motion for judgment or a new trial.
The injury of which plaintiff complains was received by her on December 12, 1910, by falling upon one of the sidewalks of the city, and it is her claim that the walk at this point was in a defective condition by reason of the accumulation of ice and snow which, by travel and otherwise, had become rough and uneven, and dangerous and unsafe for public use. She further claims that this condition of the walk was caused by the negligence of the city in failing properly and seasonably to remove the snow and ice, and to keep and maintain the walk in reasonably safe condition for public use.
It is well settled by the authorities that mere slipperiness of streets and sidewalks, caused by an accumulation of ice and snow, creates no liability for injuries to persons in consequence of that condition. It is equally well settled that, where ice and snow are permitted to accumulate and remain upon the streets and walks to such an extent and for such a time that slippery and dangerous ridges irregularities, and depressions are formed therein from travel or other causes, thus rendering travel thereon unsafe, the municipality may be liable, if that condition is brought about by its neglect. Henkes v. City of Minneapolis, 42 Minn. 530, 44 N.W. 1026; Wright v. City of St. Cloud, 54 Minn. 94, 55 N.W. 819; Keane v. Village, 130 N.Y. 188, 29 N.E. 130; ...
To continue reading
Request your trial