Legal Opinion · Dissent

Schaubel v. City of Manhattan

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided February 9, 1918No. 21,278Published

Appeal from Riley district court; Fred R. Smith, judge.

1DissentDawson, J.

(dissenting) : I dissent. I take no stock in the doctrine that the city should have barricaded or otherwise guarded the sides of the street. While there may be no negligence on the part of the parents in permitting their small children to play in unfrequented streets, it would be the rankest kind of negligence to permit their three-year-old babies to play in streets congested with traffic, and any street temporarily torn up for repairs and improvements should be considered as a congested street. It is difficult to see how the city could have kept the child off the street when the parents, who…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Harper v. City of TopekaSupreme Court of Kansas · 1914
  2. Gibson v. City of HuntingtonWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1893
  3. City of Chicago v. StarrIllinois Supreme Court · 1866
  4. Chicago, Kansas & Western Railroad v. BockovenSupreme Court of Kansas · 1894
  5. Union Pacific Railway Co. v. YoungSupreme Court of Kansas · 1896

1 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