TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Dunfee v. City of Iola

Agnes Dunfee v. The City of Iola

Dunfee v. City of Iola, 139 P. 1029 (Kan. 1914)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Kansas · State Highest Courts
Decided
April 11, 1914
Docket
No. 18,775
Citations
139 P. 102992 Kan. 1211914 Kan. LEXIS 181
Disposition
Affirmed.
Headnotes
HEADNOTE BY THE REPORTER. Defective Sidewalk — Knowledge of Pedestrian — Contributory Negligence. It is not -contributory negligence per se for one to walk upon a sidewalk which he knows is defective. In doing so, however, he must exercise such care as an ordinarily prudent person would exercise under similar circumstances.
Summary
Appeal from Allen district court; Oscar Foust,. judge.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Per Curiam:

The plaintiff was seriously injured by a fall on a sidewalk. She alleged negligence against the city and recovered a small judgment, from which the city has appealed.

The defect in the sidewalk consisted in a gas stop box. which stood about an inch and a quarter above the surface of the walk. It had a cover or top projecting from it which caught the toe of plaintiff’s shoe and caused, her to fall. The petition stated a cause of action and was not subject to demurrer. The plaintiff testified that she had been over the walk a number of times and had seen the stop box, but had not paid particular attention to it. The jury by their general verdict found that she was not guilty of contributory negligence. The. mere fact that she had seen the obstruction before did not require her to be constantly on the lookout for it.. The demurrer to the evidence was rightly overruled.. All the contentions raised by the defendant have been, answered in previous decisions, including the case of Spencer v. Kansas City, post, p. 161. It has been repeatedly held that it is not contributory negligence- *122 per se for one to. walk upon a sidewalk that he knows is defective. All that is required is that he must exercise such care as an ordinarily prudent man would under similar circumstances. (Garnett v. Smith, 72 Kan. 664 , 83 Pac. 615 ; Smith v. City of Rosedale, 83 Kan. 813 , 112 Pac. 626 ; McCoy v. City of Wichita, 86 Kan. 943 , 122 Pac. 894 .)

The judgment is affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1935: 11943: 21953: 11955: 119352026peak 1943 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Taggart v. City of Kansas City134 P.2d 417 (Kan. 1943)
  2. Blankenship v. City of Kansas City135 P.2d 538 (Kan. 1943)
  3. Ade v. City of Wichita41 P.2d 734 (Kan. 1935)
  4. Gaitskill v. United States129 F. Supp. 621 (D. Kan. 1955)
  5. Wright v. City of Wichita257 P.2d 1115 (Kan. 1953)

Most recent

  1. Gaitskill v. United States129 F. Supp. 621 (D. Kan. 1955)
  2. Wright v. City of Wichita257 P.2d 1115 (Kan. 1953)
  3. Blankenship v. City of Kansas City135 P.2d 538 (Kan. 1943)
  4. Taggart v. City of Kansas City134 P.2d 417 (Kan. 1943)
  5. Ade v. City of Wichita41 P.2d 734 (Kan. 1935)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 3

DepthCaseCited by
City of Garnett v. Smith, 83 P. 615 (Kan. 1905) 8
McCoy v. City of Wichita, 122 P. 894 (Kan. 1912) 4
Smith v. City of Rosedale, 112 P. 626 (Kan. 1911) 1

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list