Norris v. Litchfield
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Case, for damages to tbe plaintiff’s horse, carriage and harness, by the insufficiency of a bridge in a public highway in said Litchfield, for want of sufficient width and suitable railing.
Read the full summary
Case, for damages to tbe plaintiff’s horse, carriage and harness, by the insufficiency of a bridge in a public highway in said Litchfield, for want of sufficient width and suitable railing. The evidence tended to show that one Bixby, with two ladies, was travelling on. said highway with a horse and chaise, in a very dark evening ; that when near the bridge in question he heard a carriage approaching from the other direction; he called out to the person approaching, to stop, and turned out as he supposed as far as was safe and prudent. One Moor was in charge of the carriage approaching, which…
1Opinion of the CourtBell, J.
The question arising upon the instructions asked, as well as those given to the jury, is whether a traveller can recover against a town for damages sustained from a defect of a *276highway, if at the time of the accident he is trespassing on the rights of others, or violating a law of the State.
It is not questioned that towns are liable where the damage sustained arises in part from defects of the road, and in part from such accidents as could not be prevented by ordinary care and prudence. Palmer v. Andover, 2 Cush. 600; Hunt v. Pownall, 9 Vt. 418; or in part from the wrongful acts of others.…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Hartfield v. RoperNew York Supreme Court · 1839
- Birge v. GardinerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1849
- Beers v. Housatonuc Rail-roadSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1849
- Hunt v. Town of PownalSupreme Court of Vermont · 1837
- Moore v. Inhabitants of AbbotSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1850
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Hyatt v. Trustees of RondoutNew York Supreme Court · 1863