Mayor of Baltimore v. Holmes
Court of Appeals of Maryland
Appeal from the Court of Common Pleas. The case is stated in the opinion of the Court. Exception. — The plaintiff offered three prayers, the first of which is stated in the opinion of the Court, the others are as follows: 2. If the jury further find that the Water Department of the City of Baltimore, by its employes, although often requested to make an opening for the passage of the plaintiff in the ridge of stone, as often persistently refused ; and further find that there…
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Court of Common Pleas. The case is stated in the opinion of the Court. Exception. — The plaintiff offered three prayers, the first of which is stated in the opinion of the Court, the others are as follows: 2. If the jury further find that the Water Department of the City of Baltimore, by its employes, although often requested to make an opening for the passage of the plaintiff in the ridge of stone, as often persistently refused ; and further find that there was no other or proper way by which the plaintiff could reach the premises for the purposes of his business, then the…
1Opinion of the CourtRobinson, J.
This suit was brought to recover damages for injuries sustained by the plaintiff in attempting to lead his horse attached to a cart, over a pile or ridge of stones, which the declaration alleged, the defendant had negligently suffered to obstruct one of the public streets in t,he city of Baltimore.
The defendant through its Water Department, was laying water mains along the west side of Charles, between Mulberry and Saratoga streets, the whole work including repaving, being performed within five days.
The plaintiff was hauling materials from the old “ Albert Mansion” on Charles street, north of…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Jordan v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1901
- McCarthy v. ClarkCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1911
- Western Maryland Rail Road v. StanleyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1884
- Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. DoughertyAppellate Court of Illinois · 1883