Weide v. City of St. Paul
| Citation | 126 Minn. 491 |
| Decision Date | 17 July 1914 |
| Docket Number | Nos. 18,754-(192).,s. 18,754-(192). |
| Court | Supreme Court of Minnesota (US) |
| Parties | EMMA WEIDE v. CITY OF ST. PAUL.<SMALL><SUP>1</SUP></SMALL> |
Action in the district court for Ramsey county to recover $5,000 for injury to plaintiff received while walking upon a sidewalk in defendant city. The case was tried before Catlin, J., who granted plaintiff's motion to dismiss the action against the defendant insurance company and denied defendant city's motion for a directed verdict in its favor, and a jury which returned a verdict for $3,000 in favor of plaintiff. From an order denying its motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or for a new trial, defendant appealed. Affirmed.
O. H. O'Neill, John I. Burns and William J. Giberson, for appellant.
Wickersham & Churchill, for respondent.
Note. — The question of notice to municipality of claim and cause of injury from defects or obstructions in street is discussed in a note in 20 L.R.A.(N.S.) 757. And upon the validity of the requirement of notice of injury as condition of municipal liability, see note in 36 L.R.A.(N.S.) 1136.
Plaintiff was walking along a cement sidewalk on an unfrequented street in the city of St. Paul. She carried her four months' old child in her arms. Her evidence shows that the tiles gave way beneath her and she fell down an embankment into the adjoining lot, a distance of six to eight feet, and sustained injuries. The jury returned a verdict for plaintiff for $3,000. Defendant appeals from an order denying its alternative motion for judgment or for a new trial.
1. There is ample evidence of negligence on the part of the city.
The sidewalk was defective. It would not sustain the weight of a pedestrian.
The city was chargeable with notice of the defect. There is no evidence that any officer or employee of the city had actual knowledge of the defect. There is evidence, however, that the walk was close to the edge of an embankment, that the supporting soil, which was of sand and gravel, had fallen away for a considerable distance so that there was a hollow under the walk for almost the width of a paving block, and that this particular condition had existed for two months before the accident. In addition to this, the walk presented a neglected appearance, the blocks were separated with grass and weeds growing up between them. This evidence was sufficient to warrant the jury in finding that the city had constructive notice of the defect and that, by the exercise of ordinary care in inspection, the city authorities might have discovered the unsafe condition of the walk in time to repair it before the accident. This settles the question of the city's liability. Miller v. City of St. Paul, 38 Minn. 134, 36 N. W. 271; City of Wabasha v. Southworth, 54 Minn. 79, 87, 55 N. W. 818.
2. Defendant assails the constitutionality of chapter 245, p. 336, Laws 1913 (G. S. 1913, § 7998), which prohibits the trial court from directing a verdict. We are not concerned with this question. Had there been no such statute the court could not properly have directed a verdict. The statute, therefore, plays no part in the case.
Defendant urges that at the time the motion...
To continue reading
Request your trial