Ross v. City of New London

The majority opinion holds that the notice in this case, the relevant portion of which is printed in the footnote,1 is insuffi*649eient “as a matter of law.” I cannot agree with the majority’s reasoning that “[s]ince the notice before us fails entirely to state the cause of the plaintiff’s fall, the provision in the statute, § 13a-149, that no notice shall be held invalid because of an inaccuracy in stating the cause of the injury, if the conditions stated in the statute [otherwise] appear, avails the plaintiff nothing.”

“The demurrer [in the case before us] makes no claim that the notice is…