Legal Opinion

Young v. Village of Waterville

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided September 10, 1888PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Le Sueur county, Edson, J., presiding, overruling a demurrer to th& complaint.

1Opinion of the CourtGilfillan, C. J.

In Shartle v. City of Minneapolis, 17 Minn. 284, (308,) it was determined that a municipal corporation, having exclusive control of streets within its limits, at ieast if the means of performing the duty are placed at its disposal, is obliged to keep' them in a safe condition, and is liable for injuries caused by unreasonable neglect of that duty. Within this duty a sidewalk is but part of a street. Furnell v. City of St. Paul, 20 Minn. 101, (117;) Bohen v. City of Waseca, 32 Minn. 176, (19 N. W. Rep. 730;) Noonan v. City of Stillwater, 33 Minn. 198, (22 N. W. Rep. 444.) The charter of…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Noonan v. City of StillwaterSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1885
  2. Nelson v. RobsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1871
  3. Pinney v. First Division of the St. Paul & Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1872
  4. Bohen v. City of WasecaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1884

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Bentson v. Berde's Food Center, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1950
  2. Sternitzke v. Donahue's JewelersSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1957
  3. Lockway v. ProulxSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1969
  4. Mueller v. City of DuluthSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1922

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API