Woodward v. City of Boscobel
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Grant County. The plaintiff’s intestate, Joseph Woodard, commenced this action against the city of Boscobel to recover damages for injuries alleged to have been received by him by reason of breaking through a defective sidewalk in said city, which the city was under legal obligation to keep in repair.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Grant County. The plaintiff’s intestate, Joseph Woodard, commenced this action against the city of Boscobel to recover damages for injuries alleged to have been received by him by reason of breaking through a defective sidewalk in said city, which the city was under legal obligation to keep in repair. The plaintiff recovered judgment for $2,000 damages and costs, rendered pursuant to a special verdict, after a motion for a new trial on behalf of the city had been denied. This appeal is by the city from such judgment. Pending the appeal, the plaintiff died,…
1Opinion of the CourtLyoN, C. J.
I. The first error assigned for reversal of the judgment is the refusal of the court to order Mrs. Tate to be made a defendant to the action. If she is primarily liable for the consequences of a defective sidewalk in front of her lots, she should be a party. She is so liable under ch. 471, Laws of 1889, if it was her duty to keep such sidewalk in repair. S. & B. Ann. Stats, secs. 13395, 1339c.
An ordinance of the defendant city, adopted in 1880, was read in evidence, which charges all owners of lots in the city with the duty of keeping the sidewalk in front of their respective lots in repair.…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Brown v. Milwaukee Terminal Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1929
- O'Haver v. MontgomeryTennessee Supreme Court · 1908
- Du Cate v. Town of BrightonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1907
- Toutloff v. City of Green BayWisconsin Supreme Court · 1895
- City of Baraboo v. Excelsior Creamery Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1920
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.