Topping v. Town of St. Lawrence
| Decision Date | 29 December 1893 |
| Citation | 57 N.W. 365,86 Wis. 526 |
| Parties | TOPPING v. TOWN OF ST. LAWRENCE. |
| Court | Wisconsin Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from circuit court, Waupaca county; Charles M. Webb, Judge.
Action by Warren C. Topping, administrator of the estate of William Topping, deceased, against the town of St. Lawrence. From a judgment dismissing the complaint, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.E. L. & E. E. Browne, for appellant.
Cate, Jones & Sanborn, for respondent.
The circuit court sustained the objection of the defendant to any testimony being taken on the ground that the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The plaintiff not offering to amend the complaint, the action was dismissed, and judgment rendered against the plaintiff for costs. The plaintiff has appealed from the judgment.
The only question, therefore, is as to the sufficiency of the complaint. The complaint, in substance, is that William Topping, deceased, on the 1st day of July, 1891, was very severely injured by reason of the insufficiency and want of repair of a certain highway of said town, which consisted of holes in a certain bridge or culvert, and large stones near by, in said highway. On the 22d day of November, 1891, the said William Topping died of the injuries so received. In the intervening time between said injury and his death the said William Topping, on the 16th day of September, 1891, caused a notice to be served on one of the supervisors of said town, stating the place where said injury occurred, and describing the insufficiency and want of repair which caused the injury; and on the same day caused to be filed with the clerk of said town a written statement of his claim, to be laid before the board of audit; and said board met, considered, and rejected said claim, but not until the 5th day of April, 1892,--after his death. These steps were taken preparatory to commencing suit against said town for said injury. During the last sickness of the said William Topping, physicians, nurses, and medicines were necessarily employed, at an expense of $700, and after his death his funeral expenses were $75, and the wagon and harness injured in said accident were repaired at an expense of $25. These expenses were paid by Warren C. Topping, Gilbert W. Topping, Myron M. Topping, Frank H. Topping, Ellen Vaughn, and Evelyn E. Watts, the children and heirs at law of William Topping, (deceased;) and the said Warren C. Topping was duly appointed administrator of his estate. The said children procured the said medicines and medical attendance at the request of their father, the said William Topping. The said William Topping had no wife at the time of said injury, and left no widow, as a matter of course, at his death. It was said on the argument that the said ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
McCoullough v. Chi., R. I. & P. Ry. Co.
...B. & Q. Ry. Co. v. Van Buskirk, 58 Neb. 252, 78 N. W. 514; C., B. & Q. Ry. Co. v. Bond, 58 Neb. 385, 78 N. W. 710;Topping v. Town St. Lawrence, 86 Wis. 526, 57 N. W. 365;Winnt v. Railway Co., 74 Tex. 32, 11 S. W. 907, 5 L. R. A. 172;Railway v. Ryan, 62 Kan. 682, 64 Pac. 603;Coal Co. v. Limb......
-
McCoullough v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co.
... ... 514); Chicago, B. & Q. Ry. Co. v. Bond, 58 Neb. 385 ... (78 N.W. 710); [160 Iowa 538] Topping v. Town St ... Lawrence, 86 Wis. 526 (57 N.W. 365); Winnt v ... Railway Co., 74 Tex. 32 (11 ... ...
-
Troll v. Laclede Gas Light Co.
...within the limit fixed by the statute, the surviving parties for the necessary injury resulting to them from such death. In Topping v. St. Lawrence, supra, the statute consideration provided as follows: "And in every such action, the jury may give such damages, not exceeding five thousand d......
-
In re Estate of Williams
...102 Wis. 137 (77 N.W. 748, 78 N.W. 771, 44 L.R.A. 579); Foot v. R. R. Co., 81 Minn. 493 (84 N.W. 342, 52 L.R.A. 354); Topping v. St. Lawrence, 86 Wis. 526 (57 N.W. 365). fact that the recovery must be enforced, if at all, by the administrator, does not of itself make the amount a part of th......