Case ID: minn_32/html/0478-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Gilfillan, C. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Eve Stoker vs. City of Minneapolis.
    November 29, 1884.
    Contributory Negligence — Evidence.—Evidence as to plaintiff’s contributory negligence held sucii as to justify a submission of the case to the jury.
    Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Hennepin' county, Young, J., presiding, refusing a new trial, after a verdict of $2,300, for injuries occasioned by plaintiff’s falling into a ditch or gully in Fifth street, in Minneapolis, between seven and eight o’clock in the evening of October 25, 1883. The street had been graded up with sand, which had been washed out by water used in •extinguishing a fire near the place of the accident, on October 7th, the gully being about three feet deep and about four and one-half feet wide. The plaintiff’s testimony was to the effect that she was crossing Fifth street, it being quite dark, and came to the ditch across which two planks had been placed. She tried the planks, and, being a heavy woman, was afraid they would not sustain her weight, and so went a few steps along the side of the ditch, when the bank gave way and .she fell in, receiving the injuries complained of. She had no previous knowledge of the condition of the street.
    
      Judso)i N. Cross, for appellant.
    
      Thomas Canty, for respondent.
   Gilfillan, C. J.

The defendant insists that plaintiff’s own evidence showed her to have been guilty of negligence that contributed to the injury, and that the case ought, therefore, to have been dismissed on its motion. On that point the evidence made the case a very close one, but we think different minds might fairly arrive at different conclusions upon it, and that the case was properly left to the jury.

Order affirmed.