Taylor v. City of Cumberland
| Decision Date | 24 June 1885 |
| Parties | TAYLOR v. MAYOR, ETC., OF THE CITY OF CUMBERLAND. [1] |
| Court | Maryland Court of Appeals |
Appeal from circuit court, Allegany county.
At the trial the plaintiff offered the three following prayers: (1) That if the jury believe from the evidence that the defendant was, prior to the 27th day of December, 1883, and has been ever since, and is now, a municipal corporation, duly incorporated, and that one of the streets in said corporation was and is named and known as "Washington Street," and that for days prior to said 27th day of December, 1883 and on said day, the said street and the sidewalks thereof were covered with snow and ice, and that a large number of sleds and other sliding vehicles known as "Easterns" were, during said time, and on said day driven, propelled, and ridden upon by men and boys over the said snow and ice on said street and sidewalks at a great and dangerous rate of speed, and that the mayor and the police officers of the defendant, or some of them, well knew, or had ample means of knowing, that said street and sidewalks were covered with snow and ice, and that large numbers of men and boys were driving, propelling, and riding upon said sleds and other sliding vehicles over said snow and ice on said street and sidewalks, during said time, and on said day, and that the plaintiff while crossing one of the sidewalks of said street, and while exercising due and proper care on his part was struck and knocked down by one of said sleds or sliding vehicles known as an "Eastern," and was injured thereby, then the plaintiff is entitled to recover such damages as they may believe was occasioned him by being so struck and knocked down, even though they further find that the mayor and captain of the police of the defendant instructed the officers of the police to break up and stop said men and boys from driving, propelling, and riding upon said sleds and other sliding vehicles over the snow and ice on said street and sidewalks, and that the said police officers made all reasonable and proper efforts to carry out said instructions, and were unable to prevent or stop said men and boys from using said street and sidewalks in the manner described by the witnesses; (2) that, in considering the question of negligence, it is competent for the jury, in connection with the other facts and circumstances of the case, to infer the absence of fault on the part of the plaintiff from the general and known disposition of men to take care of themselves, and to keep out of the way of difficulty and danger; (3) that if the jury should find their verdict in favor of the plaintiff, then, in estimating the damages to be given, they may consider the health and mental and physical condition of the plaintiff before the injury complained of, as compared with his present condition of mind and body in consequence of the injury, and whether the injury is in its nature permanent, and how it is calculated to disable the plaintiff from engaging in those employments and pursuits for which, in the absence of the injury, he would have been qualified, and also the physical and mental sufferings to which he has been subjected by reason of said injury, and to allow such damages as, in the opinion of the jury, will be a fair and just compensation for the injury which he has sustained.
The defendant offered the two following prayers: (1) That if the jury find from the evidence that the injuries complained of by the plaintiff were caused alone by his being run into or struck by a sled used by a small party of boys in sliding down Washington street in the city of Cumberland, and that such use of the street or its pavement was not authorized or directed by the defendant, and that at the...
To continue reading
Request your trial