Wright v. City of Muskegon
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Muskegon; Russell, J. Case by Edward Wright against the city of Muskegon for personal injuries. There was judgment for defendant on a verdict directed by the court, and plaintiff brings error. The board of supervisors of the county of Muskegon made a contract with one Louis H. Kanitz for the construction and repair of a cement sidewalk on one side of the court-house square.
Read the full summary
Error to Muskegon; Russell, J. Case by Edward Wright against the city of Muskegon for personal injuries. There was judgment for defendant on a verdict directed by the court, and plaintiff brings error. The board of supervisors of the county of Muskegon made a contract with one Louis H. Kanitz for the construction and repair of a cement sidewalk on one side of the court-house square. The work was completed about noon, and, in order to prevent ped.estrians from walking over it before it was sufficiently hardened, a piece of woven wire fence, about two feet high, was stretched across the ends.…
1Opinion of the CourtGrant, J.
{after stating the facts). The defendant city exercised no supervision or control over the construction of this walk. It was done entirely by the board of supervisors under a contract with which the city had nothing to do. The precise question was raised in Thompson v. City of West Bay City, 137 Mich. 94, and decided against the plaintiff’s contention. It is unnecessary to repeat the reasoning of that case.
The judgment is affirmed.
Moore, C. J., and Blair, Montgomery, and Ostrander, JJ., concurred.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Thompson v. City of West Bay CityMichigan Supreme Court · 1904
3Cited by2 opinions
- Bonneville v. City of AlpenaMichigan Supreme Court · 1909
- Bonneville v. City of AlpenaMichigan Supreme Court · 1909