The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1897-04-03
SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT.

LAW l6rm-U6sU6fu DIVISION.
The following decision and rescript in
volving the liabilities of towns for the
maintenance Of wages was sent down
from the Law court yesterday. II is the
case of Nancy e. Hutchins against the
inhabitants OF the town of Sullivan.
There was depression in a sidewalk of
the defendant town, about three feet
long, two feet wide, and five and quar-
ter inches deep in the lowest place.
The plaintiff while walking along on this
sidewalk on dark foggy evening.
| stepped into the depre. on, was thereby
thrown down, breaking her arm and
otherwise injilring herself. The verdict
was against the town with damages as
sessed at $500. The counsel fled excep-
ito ms and a motion for new trial.
Rescript by Judge Walton-1. The
Revised Statutes. chapter 1e, section vs..
declare that, when buildings OF fences
have existed more than twenty years
fronting upon any way, street, lane, or
bounds OF which cannot be made certain
by records or monuments. such buildings
or fences shall be deemed the true bounds
thereof. The defendants claimed at the
trial in the court below that this statute
does not apply to this class of oases, and
that the plaintiff could not establish the
limits of the way in question in the
manner referred to, even by proof
sufficient to satisfy all the requirements
of the statute. The court ruled other
wise. We think the ruling was correct
2. The defendant claimed that the side
walk in question was built by private
persons, and that the town had never
made any repairs on 1T, or assumed any
responsibility for repairs on it; aud the
defendants requested the court to rule
that under the circumstance the town
would not be liable for defects in it. The
court declined to SO rule, ard instructed
the jury that when private parties con-
struct q sidewalk within the limits Of a
| highway, which has the character and
| general appearance OF a public walk, SO
that thereby the public is justified in be-
| lieving that they are invited to walk up
on 1t as part OF the public way, and it
is TINS as cd for series of years by the
public, the town will be liable for defects
In it the same as if the town had con-
structed it in the first place.
We think this ruling was correct We
are not aware that this precise question
has before been presented to this court;
but 1T has been presented to other courts,
and they have held that when n sidewalk
has been built, no matter by whom or by
what authority, and the municipal
authorities have notice TINT it has be-
come defective or dangerous to public
travel. the municipality will be liable as
though the sidewalk had been built by
it's express authority.
The defendants excepted to the nd
mission of the plaintiffs notice to the
selectmen of the town, on the ground
that it did not sufficiently describe the
location of the defect. The notice de-
scribed the location of the defect as a
hole in the sidewalk situated between
Hotel Cleaves and Dunbar Brothers
store upon town way in said town of
sullivan. The evidence shows that the
distance between the hotel and the store
was 815 feet--a fraction over 10 rods-and
it is urged in defense that while this