Legal Opinion

George v. City of Haverhill

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided November 15, 1872PublishedCited by 42 opinions

Tort, by John S. George, and Lucy A. George, his wife, under the Gen. Sts. c. 44, § 22, to recover for personal injuries to her occasioned by a defect in Main Street in Haverhill, a highway which the defendants were bound to keep in repair.

Read the full summary

Tort, by John S. George, and Lucy A. George, his wife, under the Gen. Sts. c. 44, § 22, to recover for personal injuries to her occasioned by a defect in Main Street in Haverhill, a highway which the defendants were bound to keep in repair. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Putnam, J., it appeared that the injury was caused by a fall occasioned by Lucy A. "George striking her foot, on the evening of November 27, 1870, against a piece of plank four inches wide by two inches thick, laid across the sidewalk on Main Street; that the sidewalk was of gravel, except a few rods of brick ;…

1Opinion of the CourtColt, J.

1. The liability of cities and towns for defects in highways is a statute liability. The requirement is that highways should be kept safe and convenient for travellers at all times. If the way, by this standard, is defective, and the defect had existed for the space of twenty-four hours, or there was reasonable notice of it, and injury is thereby caused without the fault of the traveller, the liability of the town is fixed. It is the duty of the town to repair the defect within the time named, or seasonably to warn the traveller so that he may avoid the danger. The question what is safe and…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Thomas v. Western Union Telegraph Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
  2. Mahoney v. Metropolitan RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1870
  3. Billings v. City of WorcesterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1869

3Cited by42 opinions

  1. Dewire v. BaileyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1881
  2. Campbell v. City of BostonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1905
  3. Conklin v. Consolidated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
  4. Ginns v. C. T. Sherer Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
  5. Heckman v. EvensonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1897

37 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