City of Wayne v. Dixon

Nebraska Supreme Court

City of Wayne v. Dixon

110 N.W. 1135, 78 Neb. 270, 1907 Neb. LEXIS 167

CourtNebraska Supreme Court

DecidedJanuary 17, 1907

DocketNo. 14,641

StatusPublished

This text of 110 N.W. 1135 (City of Wayne v. Dixon) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nebraska Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

City of Wayne v. Dixon, 110 N.W. 1135, 78 Neb. 270, 1907 Neb. LEXIS 167 (Neb. 1907).

Pincite

Opinion

Duffie, C.

The appellant, city of Wayne, asks us to reverse a judg-' ment rendered against it in favor of the appellee on account of an injury alleged to have been sustained on account of the defective condition of a sidewalk in said village. The grounds 'urged for a reversal are: First, that the verdict is not sustained by the evidence; and, second, that the verdict.is contrary to law.

The injury complained of was sustained on June 21, 1904, and evidence was introduced by the city tending to show that the walk, upon notice given by it to the owner of the adjoining lot, was repaired by such lot owner some time in May and was in good condition at the time of the injury. The evidence was conflicting. Witnesses for the appellee testified that an examination of the walk immediately after the injury disclosed that there was no stringer extending under one side of the walk. Another witness testified that the walk was patched up with old boxes and rotten lumber for sills; that the boards were rotten and in many places there were no boards at all. The rule has always prevailed that we will not interfere with a judgment upon conflicting evidence.

[271]*271We recommend an affirmance of the judgment.

Albert and Jackson, CO., concur.

By the Court: For the reasons stated in the foregoing opinion, the judgment of the district court is

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Duffie, C.

The appellant, city of Wayne, asks us to reverse a judg-' ment rendered against it in favor of the appellee on account of an injury alleged to have been sustained on account of the defective condition of a sidewalk in said village. The grounds 'urged for a reversal are: First, that the verdict is not sustained by the evidence; and, second, that the verdict.is contrary to law.

The injury complained of was sustained on June 21, 1904, and evidence was introduced by the city tending to show that the walk, upon notice given by it to the owner of the adjoining lot, was repaired by such lot owner some time in May and was in good condition at the time of the injury. The evidence was conflicting. Witnesses for the appellee testified that an examination of the walk immediately after the injury disclosed that there was no stringer extending under one side of the walk. Another witness testified that the walk was patched up with old boxes and rotten lumber for sills; that the boards were rotten and in many places there were no boards at all. The rule has always prevailed that we will not interfere with a judgment upon conflicting evidence.

[271]*271We recommend an affirmance of the judgment.

Albert and Jackson, CO., concur.

By the Court: For the reasons stated in the foregoing opinion, the judgment of the district court is

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

110 N.W. 1135, 78 Neb. 270, 1907 Neb. LEXIS 167, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-wayne-v-dixon-neb-1907.