The Fargo forum and daily republican. [volume] (Fargo, N.D.) 1894-1957, 1913-03-05
DECISION OF THE
SUPREME COURT

Lena Jackson and j.. w. Jackson VS..
City Of Grand Forks.
/. A city nay be held liable in an
action for damages where the evil
dcnco, of at least some Of the witness
eS, which Is believed by the jury,
shows that a portion of a sidewalk
has remained covered with ice and
snow during the whole winter, and
such ice n snow has been allowed
to thaw and freeze and accumulate
during such time, and no effort has
been made by the city either to re-
move 1t or cause the same to be re-
moved or TO sprinkle IT with sand or
other substance in order to render 1t
less dangerous, and the evidence also
shows that u ice and snow was
Irampled into ruts, mounds, humps
and nilloCks by the pedestrians during
a thaw n frozen In such condition,
and that after a snow storm which
later fell upon and largely hid the
same, plaintiff slipped and tell there
on.
z. A traveller is not required to
foregO travelling upon a sidewalk
merely because ne has knowledge that
it is in a somewhat defective Condi-
ton. He has, as a general rule, a
right to assume that 1t Is safe, and
when he is injured as a consequence
of a defect of which he had previous
knowledge, h mere fact Of mis- pre-
viouS knowledge does not per sc es-
a biish co%ntTibutory negligence.
;. The question OF contributory
negligence whether it be of a defend
ant or the alleged contributory negli-
genCe Of the plaintiff, is primarily and
generally a question Of fact for the
jury. The question becomes one of
law, authorizing the withdrawal
thereof from the jury, only when but
one conclusion can be drawn from the
undisputed facts.
4. Notice to the city, in such a
case, is sufficiently shown by proof of
the long continuance of the accumu-
lation.
5. In an action against the city, in
such a case, it is not error to intro
duce in evidence the charter of the
city, which gives it the power to re-
qulre the wner or occupant Of any
premises to keep the sidewalks in
front of and along the same free from
snow or other obstruction, or the or
dinances Of the city which provide
that the owners and occupants of the
land shall clear the sidewalks Of all
accumulations of snow and ice within
ten hours after the same have fallen
or accumulated under liability to a
fine, the court being justified in as
Stunning that such charter and ordt-
nanCes were introduced, not for the
purpose Of ~prejudicing the jury and
making. them believe that the owner
or occupant would be ultimately liable
in the action, but for the purpose OF
showing an assumption of control by
the city, and its construction Of its
duty in relation to the sidewalks In
| question, as we'll as the right of the
plaintiff to rely upon such assump.
ton. Such evidence may be intro
duced even though the ordinances and
charter are not specially pleaded
Charter provisions and ordinances
need only be pleaded when a violation
of them Is the foundation of the &C.
ton. '.-..
(Syllabus by the court.)
Appeal from the district court. Of
Grand Forks county, Templeton, j.
Action against the city to recover
damages resulting from personal in.
juries sustained in slipping and falling
on an icy sidewalk. Judgment fol
plaintiff. Defendant appeals.
Judgments affirmed. Opinion by
Bruce, j.
j. B. Wineman, Grand Forks, fol
the city.
George A. Bangs for the nlaintiffs