Hillyer v. City of East Cleveland
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtStewart, J.
In the present case not only were the driveways leading into Shell’s premises constructed by Shell but the sidewalk between such driveways was relaid by it.
There can be no question that the driveways were constructed primarily for the benefit of Shell and its customers, although portions of the driveways were a part of the sidewalk over which pedestrians walked.
Ordinarily, where an abutting owner has constructed a sidewalk along his premises and a municipality has accepted it, the responsibility for keeping the sidewalk open, in repair and free from nuisance is not the responsibility of the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Bello v. ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 1922
- Tompkins v. Clay St. R.R.California Supreme Court · 1884
- Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co. v. HilligossIndiana Supreme Court · 1908
- Herron v. City of YoungstownOhio Supreme Court · 1940
- Hubbard v. St. Louis & Meramec River RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1903
3Cited by23 opinions
- Kenneth M. Romstadt v. Allstate Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1995
- Riley v. City of CincinnatiOhio Supreme Court · 1976
- Chitlik v. Allstate Ins.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1973
- Finney v. FARMERS INSURANCECourt of Appeals of Washington · 1978
- Ford Motor Company v. Wallace H. TomlinsonCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1956
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.