Iowa County democrat. [volume] (Mineral Point, Wis.) 1877-1938, 1879-12-12

y
ficient interest, copy of the e.4arre
of Hon. Alya Stewart, Judge of the
circuit court of Dane county, to the
Jury In the ease of James b..
Prideaux and wife vs.. The city Of
Mineral Point; also the instruction
asked by the attorneys Of the city
and refused by the Judge.
was informed by the foreman
that on the first ballot the jury
stood eleven for the plaintiff and
one for the defendant; that the one
Immediately yielded when the jury
marked for the amount of damages.
That the marks varied from $1,000
to $4,000, more being for $1,000
than any other figure, and that
the jury then unanimously fixed
upon that sum.
A motion for IL new trial was
made by the attorneys for the city,
which was overruled during the
the same day (Nov. 29th), Judge
Stewart rcmarlring that he did not
wish to hear any argument on IT.
and Judgment was signed Tor $1,000
damages and for costs and disburbe-
ments. The costs have not yet
been taxed but will probably be
about $500. Ii CHS Judgment
shall be paid now before interest
(Which exceeds 81 per day) and
further costs shall accumulate, il
will amount TO eight and seven.
tonths mills on the assessed vnlua-
ton of the city (S6l0WO; being
1910 for each 81 600 for which any
taxpayer is assessed.
Moses NJ STRONG.
CIRCUIT COURT DANE CO.
NOVEMBER FERN, 1879. !
JAMES Is. pRIpEAuX, III AZ
vs..
THE CITY or MINERAL PolNr }
The Revised Slal ules III this state de-
claro that II amy person, ny reason Of
the insuiliciency or want OF repairs
of any road In any town, city or village,
suBtuins any damage II may he sued
for and recovered uf the town, city or
village IN which the highway Is Sltllat-
cd. This rule requires that Inc nigh
WAYS bemade and kept reasonably Sale
for all travellers passing over lheln Win
ordinary care. whether on lool, ~ ear
riageaor OF her vehicles, ana ell llrr III llie
tlay time or evening, aud III All times III
which highways are usually llhVrllrd,
not only upm the surface Of the liiYrll-
ed track or tracks within the limits OF
tho highway, but upon HE margin u
border Of such track OF tracks. IN TINS
case do not know rs it ~ claimed THAT
there was not upon the tor and along
tho raised part of the road IN question
unon the north side of the street, II
good, smooth track of sufficient width
for persons 10 travel over willl Teams,
and even to pnSs or meet olller lcNlllA.
The complaint Is that IL wna 80 con-
structed ia no to lie reasonably sale NJ
the south side Of this track for persons
travelling even with ordinary care, ana
especially nj such times IN the evening
and under such circumstances ana WI II
such knowledge Az II is claimed the
driver Of this carriage had OF llS CON
ditiop. The road at and IN the ln,me-
date vicinity Of the accident, or III The
points where either purity claims ~
happened, hns been 80 fully described
by the testimony and summed up by
counsel, and the insuliciency or dcleet
claimed, so fully indicated tllnt II Is
hardly necessary for me tosay AMY lhillE
further upon this question ny WHY ~
calling attention To the defect claimed
upon one side and denied upon the
other. Therefore, with the rules oil
law which | have stated, ANA IN view
of the evidence. 1t Is submitted To You
to determine whether the highway NJ
the point where You find lle acc'deht
occurred wng not reasonably Sli" Tor
persons driving or travelling wllh oful-
nary care. or whether or not there MAS
All emhankment on Tile Suuln Slde ~
the truck in question, and within the
limits of the highway which cndanger-
cd travellers IN the condition III WHEN
IL was suffered to be.
If Won find there was not II ends the
case for the defendant II You llnd
there was, the next question Mlll be-
did the inguflciency cause the accident
to the carriage and the injury 10 Mrs,
pridenuxY II YOU find both ct these
questions in favor Of the plnlnllil, lie
next auestion will he: was SHE or The
driver In any degree wanting ~ or.It-
nary caution and prudence winch Guns
cd ar contributed to the inJnryf II
either of them were, the pNlnlltr : case
fails. even though You may una thai
the highway was not reasonably Sate
or that IL was insufficient. Persons
who claim damages for Tho negligence
of others or on account OF defective
highways while travelling III private
conyeyances cannot recover 4 there
was negligence amounting to amy want
of ordinary care upon the part OF The
person claiming such damages, or upon
The part of the driver of the private
conveyance in which such person Is III
the time riding. ,.. -.
A word in relation 70 ordinary care
and prudence, and what y meant by
the term,--nnd to prevent all niisappre'
tensions, IL shall nso Other. terms
such ms proper caution and prudence oi
want of il, or anything to that effect,
shall mean ordinary caution ana pri.
dence or tho want of H. In its most
general sense, ordinary caution ana
prudence may be deinedto be such eau
ton and prudence rs persons 81 oiui-
nary care and prudence usually observe
as rules of conduct In conducting theif
business or affairs 70 be little more
a al =