Warner v. City of Chicago

MR. JUSTICE RYAN,

also dissenting:

I must respectfully dissent from the opinion of the majority of my colleagues because I feel that under the facts of this case a reasonably prudent man would not anticipate danger to a person using the sidewalk in question under the circumstances present on the date of the accident. Thus, no question of fact was presented for a jury’s determination. Arvidson v. City of Elmhurst (1957), 11 Ill. 2d 601, 605.

Although this court in Arvidson rejected the practice of fixing arbitrary standards with mathematical precision as to what constitutes minor defects in…