Legal Opinion

Schadt v. Latchford

Supreme Court of Delaware

Decided February 6, 2004No. 232, 2002PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

STEELE, Justice:

The City of Wilmington enacted an ordinance that imposed upon private landowners holding property adjacent to the City’s public sidewalks a duty to repair and maintain abutting public sidewalks. The ordinance imposes sole responsibility for damages for a breach of that duty upon the private landowner. Plaintiff/Appellee successfully contended below that Defendants/Appellants property owners negligently breached their duty to keep the City owned sidewalks safe for pedestrians. A jury awarded her compensation for her personal injuries resulting from that breach.…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Paulsen v. PortlandSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
  2. Butterworth v. BoydCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
  3. West Coast Advertising Co. v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
  4. Brougher v. Board of Public Works of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
  5. SmithKline Beecham Pharmaceuticals Co. v. Merck & Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Delaware · 2000

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Wilhelm v. RyanSupreme Court of Delaware · 2006
  2. Bonito Partners, LLC v. City of FlagstaffCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2012
  3. Lemos v. WillisSupreme Court of Delaware · 2004
  4. Crown Castle Fiber LLC v. City of WilmingtonSuperior Court of Delaware · 2022
  5. FMC Corporation v. New Castle County Special Services DepartmentSuperior Court of Delaware · 2018

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API