Legal Opinion

Thomas v. City of Findlay

Ohio Circuit Courts

Decided March 15, 1892Published

Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Hancock County. The plaintiff in error was plaintiff below. Pie sues the city to recover damages for a personal injury.

Read the full summary

Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Hancock County. The plaintiff in error was plaintiff below. Pie sues the city to recover damages for a personal injury. In his petition he alleges that the city has a fire department; that it knowingly permitted its servants and firemen having charge of its chemical engine and a team attached thereto, to drive at a rapid rate on one of its streets, and to use said street for the purpose of racing, and while the plaintiff was driving his horse and buggy on said street, said firemen carelessly and negligently ran said team and chemical engine against his…

1Opinion of the CourtBeer, J.

Does the petition state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action V

Permitting the firemen to race in the street was not the proximate cause of the injury, as shown by the petition. The proximate cause of the injury was the negligent act of the firemen complained of.

Is the city liable on the maxim of respondeat superior for such negligent act, assuming that it has charge of the streets and that it established the fire department ?

If the municipal corporation appoints or elects servants or agents, and can control them in the discharge of their duties, can continue or remove them, can…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Maxmilian v. . MayorNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
  2. Fisher v. City of BostonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1870
  3. Brinkmeyer v. City of EvansvilleIndiana Supreme Court · 1867
  4. Jewett v. City of New HavenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1871
  5. Heller v. Mayor of SedaliaSupreme Court of Missouri · 1873

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API