Legal Opinion · Dissent

City of Tulsa v. Roberts

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided May 1, 1940No. 29434Published

1DissentDavison, J.

I am unable to agree with the conclusion announced by a majority of my associates in this case, and deem the matter of sufficient importance to warrant an analysis of the case in a dissenting opinion.

In this state the maintenance of streets is a proprietary function of government, and the failure of a municipality to properly perform its duties in connection therewith may constitute the basis of civil liability!

There are, however, two rules recognized by this court, each of which, when applicable, operates to -excuse the municipality from liability.

The one is sometimes known as the “trivial…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Stern v. International Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1917
  2. Oklahoma City v. FosterSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1926
  3. City of Shawnee v. RoushSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1923
  4. City of Tulsa v. FryeSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1933
  5. Ford v. City of Des MoinesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1898

25 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