Neff v. City of Cameron
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Andrew Circuit Court. — Hon. A. D. Burnes, Judge. (1) All persons must use ordinary care in going over a sidewalk. This applies to the parents as well as to children when the child is being guarded by the parent. The city of Cameron was only required to keep its sidewalks in a reasonably safe condition for ■persons whom they might reasonably expect would use such walk. They are not insurers against accident to -children, no more than they are to adults.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Andrew Circuit Court. — Hon. A. D. Burnes, Judge. (1) All persons must use ordinary care in going over a sidewalk. This applies to the parents as well as to children when the child is being guarded by the parent. The city of Cameron was only required to keep its sidewalks in a reasonably safe condition for ■persons whom they might reasonably expect would use such walk. They are not insurers against accident to -children, no more than they are to adults. If parents knowingly permit their children to play in a dangerous place, or knowingly lead them in a careless manner, and the…
1Opinion of the CourtLamm, J.
Iii an action for $25,000 damages grounded on negligence, plaintiff recovered $10!,000, and defendant city appeals.
Cameron is a city of the third class with a north- and-south street named Orange. On the east side of Orange was a four-foot wooden sidewalk made of stringers laid lengthwise and boards nailed crosswise. On April 15, 1903, Joy Neff was about two years old. On that day, according to plaintiff’s evidence, while led by her mother, she was walking- on this sidewalk. The 'mother stepped on a loose board. It flew up and struck her on the left leg just below the knee-cap, causing…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Hartfield v. RoperNew York Supreme Court · 1839
- Mattson v. Minnesota & North Wisconsin RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1905
- Robinson v. ConeSupreme Court of Vermont · 1850
- Chicago City Railway Co. v. WilcoxIllinois Supreme Court · 1891
- City of Evansville v. SenhennIndiana Supreme Court · 1897
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by41 opinions
- Chawkley v. Wabash Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1927
- Neal v. Curtis & Co. Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1931
- Hungate v. HudsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1945
- Larson v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1912
- McGowan v. WellsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1930
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.